This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the Cygwin project.
Re: [ITP] mtr
On 2019-07-22 05:36, Jon Turney wrote:
> On 21/07/2019 19:27, Brian Inglis wrote:
>> On 2019-07-21 12:10, Brian Inglis wrote:
>>> On 2019-07-21 06:59, Jon Turney wrote:
>>>> Not sure what you intend, so either (i) explicitly configure --without-gtk, or
>>>> (ii) add the needed gtk devel package(s) to DEPENDS.
> My fractured grammar probably didn't help make clear that I consider either of
> these alternatives valid.
So both would be good, as folks like Henning would not need to drag X into their
installs, and others on Win x86 running X could select and use the GUI.
> From what you write, it seems you really intended to omit gtk support, so I'd
> suggest you consider alternative (i) i.e. explicitly configure --without-gtk,
> and potentially revisit this when someone demonstrates a need for mtr with gtk.
>> Built with gtk2.0-devel installed now requires libgdk_pixbuf2.0_0 libglib2.0_0
>> libgtk2.0_0 which probably drags a lot of X in.
>> Is there a standard way to offer subpackages with and without X in these cases?
> I guess you could add a mtr-gtk subpackage, to contain a mtr built with gtk
> Unfortunately cygport can't create subpackages with conflicting files, and we
> can't mark packages as conflicting (yet), so you'd need to rename the mtr
> executable in that subpackage (e.g. as mtr-gtk)
What about mtr-ncurses and mtr-gtk packages and primary mtr... exes?
I have to look into whether there is any significant difference between
mtr-packet exes also requiring renaming.
Then a postinstall symlink(s) creation or update-alternatives run to base names.
Take care. Thanks, Brian Inglis, Calgary, Alberta, Canada
This email may be disturbing to some readers as it contains
too much technical detail. Reader discretion is advised.