Kurt Roeckx <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Various package need a build dependency on libxt-dev because the > configure script checks for X11/Intrinsic.h which is part of > libxt-dev but otherwise do not need libxt-dev at all. > > See for instance http://bugs.debian.org/233969 for a discussion > about it, that also has a patch.
The patch I see there is against Xrender, not Autoconf. It could be adapted into a patch against Autoconf. I can think of two ways to do so: either the existing AC_PATH_X and AC_PATH_XTRA could be replaced by the "corrected" versions, or the "corrected" versions could be added in parallel. If the existing macros were replaced, then this would have the negative effect that any program that does require Xt would now successfully configure even though it would fail to compile or link. It would also be a confusing divergence from upstream. I am not in favor of this solution. If the existing macros were supplemented with the "corrected" ones, then it would still be a divergence from upstream but it would not be as confusing. Configuration scripts would have to be modified to use the "corrected" macros. This seems like a slightly better solution. In the end, though, I'm not convinced that this problem really needs a solution. Why is it so bad to add "libxt-dev" to Build-Depends? > It would be nice if this could be fixed upstream (for 2.60?) if > it isn't already. It is not clear to me that it is a bug in Autoconf from upstream perspective. Xt is part of X and it seems reasonable to assume that someone who has Xlib also has Xt. -- Ben Pfaff email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] web: http://benpfaff.org -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
