Le mar 09/09/2003 à 12:50, Keith Matthews a écrit :
On Tue, 09 Sep 2003 19:09:04 +0300 Shachar Shemesh wine-devel@shemesh.biz 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