From: Omer Zak (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Wed Feb 05 2003 - 01:29:12 EST
In general, I am in favor of using libglade2, as it does not add much to
the product's footprint, and the advantages were eloquently explained.
On Tue, 4 Feb 2003, Dom Lachowicz wrote:
> ... Further, it is a standard library installed
> by every Linux distribution.
This is not an advantage. This is a liability - see below.
> Adding a 100k library dependancy for these purposes
> should not be construed as bloat.
Not a bloat, but a contribution to dependency hell.
What happens if the installed libglade2 version is incompatible with what
What happens in other platforms such as *BSD or QNX?
It may be feasible to create builds of AbiWord with libglade2 statically
linked to the executable. But won't this proliferate the number of
builds, as the need (or desirability) to use more libraries is identified?
My opinions, as expressed in this E-mail message, are mine alone.
They do not represent the official policy of any organization with which
I may be affiliated in any way.
WARNING TO SPAMMERS: at http://www.zak.co.il/spamwarning.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Wed Feb 05 2003 - 01:32:32 EST