Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sat, 2 Nov 2002 23:43:18 +0100 | From | Marek Habersack <> | Subject | Re: Kconfig (qt) -> Gconfig (gtk) |
| |
On Sat, Nov 02, 2002 at 09:07:24PM +0000, Russell King scribbled: > On Sat, Nov 02, 2002 at 08:36:08PM +0000, Dr. David Alan Gilbert wrote: > > Wouldn't it be more helpful to iron the (few) small glitches out of the > > qt based one than write a new one just because you don't happen to like > > the library? > > Maybe, maybe not. Most, if not all of my boxes here don't have qt, and > they're not going to get qt any time soon. qt has a long list of > dependencies which gtk doesn't have, which, imho is an overriding factor > for why we should have a gtk implementation. Exactly. On Debian the qt2 devel stuff is 17MB (!). Yesterday I was trying to compile 2.5.45 just to see that even doing make menuconfig (which I always use) breaks because of missing qt. It turned out that the problem is in the scripts/kconfig/Makefile which executes the $(obj)/.tmp_qtcheck no matter which configuration interface is used [1]. Adding '-' in front of the rule served as a temporary work-around, but I got a bit shocked on finding out that I'd have to dload 17MB of the Qt devel packages. > Not that I used the old xconfig often anyway. 8) Neither, but since it's here, it better work on any box :)
marek
[1] That's why I'm CCing this message to Roman Zippel, forgot to send a but report yesterday :> [unhandled content-type:application/pgp-signature] | |