[arch-dev-public] [core] progress
roman.kyrylych at gmail.com
Sat Sep 15 04:56:42 EDT 2007
2007/9/15, Aaron Griffin <aaronmgriffin at gmail.com>:
> On 9/14/07, Jan de Groot <jan at jgc.homeip.net> wrote:
> > Looking at glib2, it's 5.1MB installed size. That includes both static
> > and shared libs. 1.3MB of that is static libs that we add to it to make
> > sure that syslog-ng can compile static. Is it really so hard to have a
> > library with a G in the name on a base system? Other option is to take a
> > version of syslog-ng that didn't depend on glib2. Compiling glib2 static
> > into syslog-ng will also make the binary bigger, so the savings of not
> > having glib2 on your system is actually even smaller than the 3.8MB that
> > would be "lost" when installing glib2 with only dynamic libs.
> Hey, I'm fine with having glib2 in core. It's a decent library after all.
> I'm all for the simplest solution to this, because it's really a minor
> issue in the grand scheme. To me, it looks like the simplest solution
> is to just include it in the repo. It's not a huge deal, it IS only a
> makedepend anyway.
IMO we *can* have makedepends in any other binary repo, it does not
Moving makedepends to the same repo brings nothing useful IMO.
Roman Kyrylych (Роман Кирилич)
More information about the arch-dev-public