compile problems with xfrun

[Jasper Huijsmans]

On Thu, Jul 22, 2004 at 09:44:24AM -0500, edscott wrote:
> El jue, 22-07-2004 a las 08:44, Jasper Huijsmans escribió:
> > On Thu, Jul 22, 2004 at 08:05:39AM -0500, edscott wrote:
> > ...
> > > > Edscott, doesn't this create a build-time dependency that was only a run-time
> > > > dependency before? 
> > > 
> > > Uh-huh. In order to retain only run-time dependency only we would need a
> > > package for headers. Like the linux-headers package. 
> > > 
> > 
> > Hmm, I don't think I like the sound of that ;)
> 
> Too late ;) 
> 
> > 
> > It does seem to me that it also makes libdbh a new dependency for Xfce 
> > (instead of for xffm only). I'm not saying that is bad, but it is a change.
> > 
> 
> No, that has not changed. I repeat: the modules code is not available at
> run time if libdbh is not found (modules depends on dbh). Xfutils checks
> for libdbh, but compilation will proceed if it is found or not. Libdbh
> cannot be loaded as a module for performance reasons.
> 
> > Anyway, I just wanted to raise the issue here to see if anyone has objections
> > or otherwise strong opinion about it.
> 
> Do you have any strong objection? Do you object to changing the location
> of header files for libxfcgui4 and libxfceutil as well? If so, why? I
> want to change the way xffm uses these libraries and do it in a
> load/unload fashion to keep memory footprint down. 
> 
> 

No real objections, just that I'd like to keep the number of modules down. So
adding another one, xfheaders, doesn't sound right. Can't we include this in
one of the library modules?