[Image-SIG] Re: Processed: oops
Fri, 13 Aug 1999 15:08:44 -0300
On Fri, Aug 13, 1999 at 06:57:03PM +0200, Fredrik Lundh wrote:
> Lalo Martins <email@example.com> wrote:
> > Sorry, I gave the reasons on a separate message so that they
> > stay on the archive. No offense to you; basically the mistake of
> > depending on tk is no longer yours, but upstream. It still
> > _shouldn't_ depend on Tk - drawing images on X is only one of
> > the many things it can do.
> besides from that, it would help if you didn't
> assume that everyone is writing code in (or
> for) exactly the same environment as you
> are (what bug? what archive? what mistake?)
Sorry :-) we were talking about the Debian package, Debian
package dependencies (if the python-pil package has a file
linked against libtk, the package will depend on the tk8.0
package), the Debian Bug Tracking System, and the archive of
this particular bug in this System. Visit
http://bugs.debian.org/python-pil to see for yourself.
What I mean by "disagreeing with the dependency" is; IMVHO,
_imaging.so shouldn't link to libtk at all; it should instead
only use functions from tkinter, so it works on a machine where
tk (and tkinter) aren't installed. The way it is, if I want to
use PIL on such a machine I have to recompile it. Not that this
is so much of a big deal, but the idea of packaging stuff is
that people can use it without recompiling.
Also, without studying the source thoroughly (sorry if I
mispelled, it's a nasty word already), I can't even understand
_why_ does PIL link to libtk; what can it want from libtk that
it couldn't get from tkinter instead?
I am Lalo of deB-org. You will be freed.
Resistance is futile.
pgp key in the web page
Debian GNU/Linux -- http://www.debian.org