discuss-gnustep
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: backart - default backend?


From: Alex Perez
Subject: Re: backart - default backend?
Date: Mon, 14 Feb 2005 23:11:31 -0800
User-agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0 (Windows/20041206)

Andrew Ruder wrote:
Fellow Steppers,

Is there really some reason that we are continuing to have the -art backend *not* be the default backend?

Are dependencies really an issue? Most users blindly do a apt-get install gnustep or emerge gnustep and wouldn't care nor notice the extra dependencies.

Now, let's do some comparisons of dependencies in other projects; for example, I'll do a ldd on /usr/bin/gnome-about (stripping out the libraries with the word 'gnome' in it):
        libSM.so.6 => /usr/X11R6/lib/libSM.so.6 (0xb7f35000)
        libICE.so.6 => /usr/X11R6/lib/libICE.so.6 (0xb7f1c000)
        libbonoboui-2.so.0 => /usr/lib/libbonoboui-2.so.0 (0xb7ebd000)
        libxml2.so.2 => /usr/lib/libxml2.so.2 (0xb7dbe000)
        libpthread.so.0 => /lib/tls/i686/cmov/libpthread.so.0 (0xb7dae000)
...
        libtasn1.so.2 => /usr/lib/libtasn1.so.2 (0xb726e000)
        libgcrypt.so.11 => /usr/lib/libgcrypt.so.11 (0xb7224000)
        libgpg-error.so.0 => /usr/lib/libgpg-error.so.0 (0xb7220000)
        libexpat.so.1 => /usr/lib/libexpat.so.1 (0xb71ff000)
        libnsl.so.1 => /lib/tls/i686/cmov/libnsl.so.1 (0xb71eb000)

For sake of brevity, I will just say that the ldd output is 51 lines long. Now, a quick and dirty guesstimate on how many dependencies GNUstep has:

( ldd /usr/GNUstep/System/Library/Bundles/libgnustep-back.bundle/libgnustep-back ; ldd /usr/GNUstep/System/Library/Libraries/libgnustep-gui_d.so.0.9.4 ; ldd /usr/GNUstep/System/Library/Libraries/libgnustep-base_d.so.1.10.1 ) | sort | perl -wpe 's/^\s*([^\s]+) =>.*/$1/' | uniq | wc -l
31

That's with -art. The major extra dependency that is required going from -xlib to -art is libart2, but that is already installed on a lot of people's computers due to GNOME and is not near as much of a pain to install as KDE's qt3.

-xlib is ready to meet its end. It has its purposes - places where you really can't afford the extra dependencies (advanced users can very easily use ./configure to change it). Other than that, -xlib just looks bad and -art is just a much more capable backend. Why not have the users using the same thing that all the developers are using already?

Hopefully we can come to some conclusion one way or another (whether it be a poll amongst developers, or what-not). I am really hoping this isn't going to turn into the 200 message flame-wars that results in nothing but confusion as to what actually resulted from the flame war. (We have far too many of those). Once and for all lets just end this question since I have seen it come up far too often.

What do others think?

Support, 100%. It's far superior in almost every way.





reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]