Re: [Plib-users] Error: can not find working glut

[Tony P. <ap...@ea...>]

On Sun, 2003-01-26 at 13:35, Curtis L. Olson wrote:
> Steve Baker writes:
> > I suspect an annoying (but growing) trend with distro makers that
> > they have TWO versions of every RPM that relates to libraries - one
> > is the "Development Version" - which comes with headers and
> > binaries, the other contains *just* the binaries.
> > 
> > I've seen this with the latest version of SuSE and it's *INCREDIBLY*
> > annoying.
> 
> Debian has done this for quite some time.
> 
> The regular part comes with just the .so's, the ; the -dev portion includes
> the headers and the .a's in case any developers would want to
> statically link.

I learned about it on RH 4.something, rpm distros have been doing it for
quite sometime.  One thing that may hide it is choosing the development
option in the initial install so that the installer automatically
installs the -devel rpms and the user may well be none the wiser.

> 
> > The header files take up very little space - and if they install the
> > library without the headers then it can only be used by binary-only
> > applications.  When you try to install a source-code based project,
> > it *looks* like the library is installed when you ask RPM about it -
> > but in fact it's only halfway installed.
> 
> Without touching on what *should* be done, I believe the intention is
> exactly what you allude to ... install the minimum possible portion of
> the library to allow binaries to run.  Remember packaging for most
> people is all about pre-compiled binaries.
> 
> There are some benefits to this approach.  It minimizes download times
> and hard drive consumption (don't forget that the -dev versions of the
> lib package also include the .a's.)  It gives *most* people exactly
> what they want.
> 
> It's been this way on Debian ever since I can remember so I'm used to
> it and don't think twice about apt-get'ing the -dev portion.
> 
> But, to be fair, there is a downside to this approach (which touches
> on some of the down sides to package management in general.)
> 
> I'll make you a deal: As soon as you come up with a scheme that does
> exactly what *everyone* wants 100% of the time, I'll invest my life
> savings in your company, or vote for you, or do what ever is
> appropriate for your particular scheme. :-)
> 
> Curt.
-- 
Tony Peden <ap...@ea...>