Tushar Teredesai wrote these words on 09/09/05 18:10 CST: > Why fix the header and then revert it back? Other FAM packages (e.g. > KDE) will probably have the same compliation error. If the fix is > technically correct, just fix it during fam.
KDE has no issues with building as it is. What if a dev puts a local copy of limits.h in his package (not sure how wise it would be, but still)? > The package I mentioned, gamin is a fully compatible replacement to > fam and from a GNOME developer. AFAIK, no changes are required to any > package to make it use gamin instead of fam. Check out > <http://www.gnome.org/~veillard/gamin/differences.html>: does not need > run a daemon as root and also has support for inotify. You mean they would overwrite an existing libfam and fam.h from the FAM package? Not that it really matters (I did read up on it), but I didn't really think it was prudent for devs to use the same names for files that have already been released by another package. -- Randy rmlscsi: [GNU ld version 2.15.94.0.2 20041220] [gcc (GCC) 3.4.3] [GNU C Library stable release version 2.3.4] [Linux 2.6.10 i686] 18:11:01 up 160 days, 17:44, 3 users, load average: 1.00, 0.91, 0.54 -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
