Re: [Gnash] Missing library checks in configure

[Rob Savoye]

J.H.M. Dassen (Ray) wrote:

> > I'm applying these, but I found them to be too strict. I successfully
> > compiled gnash (no plugin) w/out linking glut in.

  Glut shouldn't be required. That's a leftover from my first shots at 
figuring out how to write a plugin for Mozilla/Firefox. This turns out 
to not be highly documented...

> As a long-time package maintainer, I'm not a big fan of configure scripts
> trying to be too smart. I'd prefer it if the user needs to explicitly
> specify that that the plugin must not be built when not all of its
> dependencies are available. The attached updated patch tries to do that
> (although I'm a bit confused about the interaction between "--enable-reader"
> and the browser plugin).

 This is why configure prints out at the end what was enabled or not so 
 it's obvious if there was a dependency problem. If I grok what you're 
saying, you'd prefer the behavior to be the make failing if something is 
missing to the current behavior of quietly not building the plugin if 
something is missing ? I'm not sure if I care one way or the other, so I 
guess I'm open to changing the default behavior. Does anyone else care 
one way or the other ?

  --enable-reader is for the XML support. I wrote both a DOM and SAX 
(using XMLReader) style parsers for XML based files and networking 
messages. This is a cool feature as it lets a Flash movie communicate 
with other devices using XML. Great for embedded devices that need to 
control something, and for the devices to control what's displayed. 
Anyway, for now, the DOM parser is the default.

        - rob -