From: <oz...@al...> - 2005-01-04 05:05:14
|
On 03/01/2005, at 8:21 AM, Alien wrote: >> Why would anyone not want all plugins? I think its much easier for the >> users to have everything in one place. > > embedded systems? or a part of some other project that needs only a few > things, that way, that other project need not be dependant on some > codec... Right, exactly. I'm currently playing around with VLC (which has a build system that really deserves major kudos[1]) to use as a Mozilla plugin, which enables you to statically compile in exactly what plugins you want into the Mozilla plugin. This means that the user simply has to drop one file into their Mozilla plugins directory to get playback working: no other modules to load, and nothing else for the user to mess around with. It's great. This is also one of the reasons why I'd like a similar system for xine; I'm hoping to work on the xine Mozilla plugin in the future when I get some time. > I don't know if putting everything in one place is so great, after all, > distro's packaging managers handle that for us... I think xine's approach of bundling libraries into the distribution tarball (for convenience) is fine, although it would be good to be able to optionally use an external library in place of xine's internal library if you have it. (This applies to some libraries right now such as libdvdnav, but not all.) Again, I'm hoping to work on this in the future, in my copious amounts of spare time ... :) 1. VLC's build system works with every single version of autoconf, automake and libtool that I've ever thrown at it (no small feat by itself!), builds out-of-the-box on Windows (Cygwin and msys/mingw32), Linux, Mac OS X, BeOS and quite a number of other platforms, and you can opt to build every module either as a plugin, statically linked into the VLC binary, or not at all. Very, very impressive. -- % Andre Pang : trust.in.love.to.save |