Re: [Re: [libxml++] UTF8 support]

[Stefan S. <se...@sy...>]

Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 19, 2003 at 05:25:02PM +0100, Christophe de VIENNE wrote:
> 
> 
>>Can't we do a default behavior (compiling qlibxml++ and glibxml++ for ex) with 
>>warnings if the user compiles it with something different ?
> 
> 
> That means the default library would be dependent on glibmm *and* Qt.
> One of Stefan's objections was that he didn't want to be dependent on
> glibmm, wasn't it?

I think your interpretation of that remark is wrong. I believe what he
suggests is that two binary packages are created from one source
package. The source package then doesn't depend on either (or at least
only a slim adapter layer does), while the binary packages are
completely independent.

What I don't understand is why distinguish between 'default' and other
builds, i.e. what should the user be warned about ? The binary package
has to be named specifically for the unicode dependence anyways.

Read: from a packageing point of view, there would be a library 
'glibxml++' dependent on packages libxml2 and glibmm, which has no
relationship at all to other 'X-libxml++' packages that may exist.

Stefan