rawhide report: 20060524 changes

Matthias Clasen mclasen at redhat.com
Wed May 24 16:57:17 UTC 2006


On Wed, 2006-05-24 at 18:55 +0200, Tomasz Kłoczko wrote:
> Dnia 24-05-2006, śro o godzinie 12:37 -0400, Bill Nottingham napisał(a):
> [..]
> > It was linked statically. Static glib libs went away, so....
> 
> OK. Next round .. why have (literaly) *one* binary (ppp-watch) which
> uses now shared libglib must affect glib ?
> Is not better rewrite this tool for not use glib ? or what so big
> performs ppp-watch where using glib is neccessary ? is it realy so hard
> rewrite this for not use glib ?
> 
> kloczek
> PS. remember: fixing some bad things by introduce some way less ass pain
> way is *most* worse way of development :>
> Better is rest this kind things in current form and add them to TODO
> list.
> 

What problem do you have with glib in /lib ?




More information about the fedora-devel-list mailing list