On May 6, 2008, at 3:06 AM, Philippe Grosjean wrote:
Simon Urbanek wrote:
It turns out that the behavior of starting just Tcl was actually a
bug.
Not completely. At least, loading of tcltk was correct when the
"bug" was there, but I totally agree that the mechanism used
(according to th
Simon Urbanek wrote:
It turns out that the behavior of starting just Tcl was actually a bug.
Not completely. At least, loading of tcltk was correct when the "bug"
was there, but I totally agree that the mechanism used (according to the
presence or not of the DISPLAY variable is not the best o
On Mon, May 05, 2008 at 02:22:03PM -0400, Simon Urbanek wrote:
> It turns out that the behavior of starting just Tcl was actually a bug.
> Apparently the intention was to attempt to start Tk regardless of the
> DISPLAY variable, because some TclTk implementation such as Aqua Tcl/Tk
> don't requi
It turns out that the behavior of starting just Tcl was actually a
bug. Apparently the intention was to attempt to start Tk regardless of
the DISPLAY variable, because some TclTk implementation such as Aqua
Tcl/Tk don't require DISPLAY and thus would not be loaded. Due to a
bug (HAVE_AQUA w
