#5 remove dependency on popt ?

open
nobody
None
5
2003-09-29
2003-09-29
No

I discovered that the sample libdv programs of the 0.99
version depend on the popt library. Since AFAIK popt is
no longer shipped as an independent package, but as a
part of the RPM package, is it possible to substitute
popt with something more standard? The way I see it,
popt has now become too much a hassle to use in
programs other than RPM itself. It is still possible to
install it separately, I guess, but having to download
a 10M tarball just to get the popt sources for an
rpm-less system is a bit too much.

BTW I find it quite strange that the programs can be
built without popt. There is a relative warning issued,
informing that no option parsing will be available, but
the binaries are built nevertheless... I did not test
if they work, but doesn't the lack of option parsing
make them useless ? If this is the case, shouldn't
their build be disabled whenever no option parsing lib
is found ?

Discussion

  • Logged In: YES
    user_id=541380

    Ok...a partially false alarm.

    I just did some additional Internet searching... it seems
    that popt was always included in RPM, but they used to
    distribute popt tarballs as well. However no official
    tarball exists for popt-1.8. It should be in the
    ftp://ftp.rpm.org/pub/rpm/dist/rpm-4.2.x directory and when
    I did not find it, I checked whether there had been some
    relative decision... and got confused by a 2-year old
    comment in the RPM distribution (well.. it _WAS_ in a newly
    updated file :-). Anyway I am now trying to contact the RPM
    developers and have them release separate popt tarballs, so
    perhaps this issue will be resolved soon.

    However the comments on the build process behaviour are
    still valid. The binaries are built, but are not even able
    to display the --version info. Perhaps they should be
    disabled when popt is not present.