[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: libgnustep-base split proposal

From: Philippe C.D. Robert
Subject: Re: libgnustep-base split proposal
Date: Fri, 24 Feb 2006 08:42:36 +0100

Hi Richard,

On 23.02.2006, at 08:49, Richard Frith-Macdonald wrote:
Whats problematic is that it isn't possible to go w/o it and run GNUstep binaries/libraries like a regular Unix tool. Thats one of the reasons why its currently not possible for OGo to switch to gstep-base.

Exactly, this is IMO a severe drawback of GNUstep, even worse, a major show stopper (at least for me)!

While there are obvious cases (attempting to use a name server daemon if there isn't one installed for instance) where there are problems ... and I'm all in favour of improving anything like that where possible, I have to say again that it is simply NOT TRUE that you can't just compile/link with the base library and run a tool.

This problem *USED* to exist because the NSCharacterSet data used to be held in external files and without NSCharacterSet working properly, string handling doesn't work properly ... so everything is messed up. But this was changed about a year ago, it's not been true for a long time now.

I'm sure there are rough edges where behavior of some classes is not ideal and needs fixing, but there are no 'show stoppers' that I have heard of. Most likely what we have are usability issues ... where we have rough edges because either nobody has reported problems or because a few (FHS support in 'make install' for instance) just haven't been dealt with yet. And those rough edges might seem like show stoppers to people who don't know how to deal with them ... so we need to know about them and smooth them off.

That's good to hear. So you are saying that one can copy solely the base .so to e.g. /usr/local/lib/ and it just works (w/o DO of course)?

Philippe C.D. Robert

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]