Neulich schrieb Geoffrey Lee:
> [...]
> Anything that carries CSS support we have to compile --without-css, I know
> this sucks, but at least you always have the source, even though I hate
> to say that you must get the source and recompile in order to get that
> support.
How about adding two packages named "libfakecss" and "libfakecss-devel"
to cooker which contain
* libfakecss
==========
- /usr/lib/libcss.so.0.1.0 (the same functions as libcss, but with
empy bodys: all returning (int)0, void
or NULL)
* libfakecss-devel
================
- /usr/include/css.h
- /usr/lib/libcss.so ->/usr/lib/libcss.so.0.1.0
- /usr/lib/libcss.so.0.1.0 -> /usr/lib/libcss.so.0.1.0
You can add "BuildRequire: libfakecss-devel" then which binds against our
dummy libcss. We could even ship this "libfakecss" with the ditribution, as
she does nothing.
If vendors replace "libfakecss" by a package named "libcss" which provides
some other functionaity it is not our fault. So nobody can sue us. Specially
if we mention it in the information (rpm -qi) as in the docs of libfakecss
that it is illegal in US to replace it by a RPM named libcss ...
--
_
Tsch�ss und bis demn�chst/� bient�t, _|_|_
(") *
Stefan /v\ /
�( )� Penguin Powered!
+----------------------------------------------------(m-m)------------------+
| Stefan Siegel | http://www.student.uni-kl.de/~siegel/ |
| Kurt-Schumacher-Str. 34 / App.144 | mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] |
| D-67663 Kaiserslautern | PGP Public Key: |
| Tel.: +49-631-18269 | finger -l [EMAIL PROTECTED] |
+---------------------------------------------------------------------------+
