On Mon, May 21, 2001 at 11:55:46AM -0400, Hall Stevenson wrote: > Yeah, I picked a good example, didn't I ?? In fact, gnumeric may not > have any sound capabilities at all. Maybe it does... Where esound > comes in is that *another* package that gnumeric requires requires > esound itself. Aren't dependencies great ?? ;-)
heh, yeah I thought that too.. but checking packages.debian.org/gnumeric I think most of the deps I listed are directly from gnumeric .. including sound.. (I'm assuming sub dependencies would not be listed on the page like that) > > > it would likely be more trouble than it's worth. > > > > certainly sounds like it :( > > This leads to another question: If a "--disable-something" option is > given to the ./configure script, is the Makefile dynamic in that it > won't check for the file(s) that would normally take care of what's > been disabled ?? Does that make sense ?? ;-) Aah not sure what you mean by the Makefile being dynamic... the configure script creates the Makefile, so if you --disable something it should not check for it and *if* (and it can be a big if) the source is well organised it should build without requiring anything related to the things you disabled.. as in --disable-bonobo (for example) should lead to #ifdefs removing any code or #includes related to bonobo ( bonobo.h and such ) and the makefile would not cause the build to link against the lib ( -lbonobo ) .. I'm making the names up but, you know , roughly :) Its not always that easy, since most developers won't test all combinations of the --disable and --enables.. its a lot of work, and can sometimes even mean writing code twice (with and without) .. IIRC building Dia and Guppi from source lets you cut out some gnome deps which is why I wondered originally... but there is a limit. I think gnumeric is probably too gnome'ified.
