libungif - Depends on obsolete X libraries - Rebuild for approval by maintainer

[Harold L Hunt II]

Frédéric L. W. Meunier wrote:

> Sorry, sent it to cygwin-xfree. Time to sleep.
> 
> On Tue, 9 Mar 2004, Harold L Hunt II wrote:
> 
> 
>>Lapo Luchini wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Actually I was thinking about using --without-x in next release.
>>>But no other program seems to use it, except WMaker, that uses X11 anyway.
>>>
>>
>>There doesn't seem to be a reason to do --without-x since libungif has
>>used it for two years without major problems.
> 
> 
> These aren't really strong arguments.
> 
> Lapo is assuming that only WindowMaker uses libungif because
> it's the only application linked to it in Cygwin.
> 
> You're assuming libungif should depend on XFree86 because it
> worked fine with it for 2 years.
> 
> linbugif compiled with --without-x will work fine too, and also
> enable other people who don't want to install XFree86 to use
> the library or any tools, except gif2x11.

Okay, I will make a stronger argument: I will be really p'odd if a 
rebuild of libungif using --without-x busts my WindowMaker package.  In 
fact, I don't even want to have to look into whether WindowMaker is 
busted or not; I want to maintain the status quo because I am too busy 
to do otherwise.  If you rebuild libungif using --without-x, rebuild 
WindowMaker against that version of libungif, install both and test them 
to confirm that WindowMaker works, then I *might* think it is okay to 
use --without-x for libungif.

This is simply following the rule of "if it ain't broke, don't fix it". 
  I often find out that lots of other people have plenty of arguments 
for leaving something alone when I cannot think of such an argument 
myself.  Of course, I figure this out after the fact; in this case I am 
not interested in being unpleasantly surprised.

> But, again, is it so hard to make 2 packages, one with
> --without-x ?

Have you done it?  Yes, it is really hard.  Think about 16 hours to work 
out all of the little kinks.

Harold