Le mar 09/09/2003 à 12:50, Keith Matthews a écrit : > On Tue, 09 Sep 2003 19:09:04 +0300 > Shachar Shemesh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > > >I am the RH package manager for Wine. > > >My RPMS are indeed without BiDi support for now, as I was aiming for > > >them to be rebuildable on any fully-updated (and nothing more) RH > > >box. Of course, I can install the required libraries and build them > > >with BiDi support if you push me to it :) > > > > > >Vincent > > > > > > > > > > > As all you have to do is have a local copy of the ICU library in order > > > > to get BiDi support in (and configure will autodetect it), I don't > > think having your RPMs compiled with BiDi support will hurt in any > > way. Your SRPMS will still be compilable on any platform (except, of > > course, that the compiled version will not have BiDi support. That, > > however, is up to each individual person). > > > > I think you should be considering multiple, alternative packages. Yes, I > know it is more work, but even the current packages have dependencies on > things that some people consider un-necessary and avoidable. > > Far too many packagers seem to want to add everything including the > kitchen sink in, the end result is packages that are a right royal PITA > if you are trying to install on a small system.
The opposite (as Debian does it) is a slew of small packages for the whole Wine functionality. So if you don't install wine-print, you can't load winspool.drv, and some apps (even some from which you don't use the print facility) won't load. It's a semi-common problem on IRC. The best way is, as Alexandre tries to go, run-time detection. Yes the executables are bigger (more functionality), but there's not more installation-time dependancies and it can use some more libs as they are installed. Vincent
