Re: new image library "requirements"

[Jan Djärv]

Eli Zaretskii skrev:
> > From: Richard Stallman <address@hidden>
> > CC: address@hidden, address@hidden
> > Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2007 18:26:00 -0400
> >
> > An error message is the right thing when a crucial feature
> > that ought to work would fail due to missing headers.
>
> How is the case of image libraries different from the X headers and
> libraries?  Currently, if X headers and/or libraries were not found
> by the configure script, we just print this in the summary at the end
> of configure, and continue as if --without-x was specified.  Are you
> saying that X support is less crucial than image support?


X development libraries are required before we even look for these image 
libraries.  There is no such thing as image support without X, except for W32 
and OSX, and those platforms don't use the image libraries we check for.

As stated earlier, it is probably a mistake to compile for X without image 
support.  Also, as has been said before, it is hard to look for X support if 
the development libraries for X is missing, even if we use the heuristic 
posted by David Kastrup.  Crosscompiling is one problem.

        Jan D.