[gobolinux-users] Enlightenment

Lucas C. Villa Real lucasvr at gobolinux.org
Wed Nov 8 00:19:21 UTC 2006

On 11/3/06, Otto Barnes <otto.barnes at gmail.com> wrote:
> I have been toying with E17 lately.  I created recipes for all of the
> dependencies of the enlightenment tarball and most of the other
> applications when I started to wonder how users were going to install
> both E16 and E17 on the same system and use them at the same time.
> Personally, I would like to type 'Compile E17' and get the whole
> thing, entrance, eterm, and themes.  So this spawns a couple
> questions:
> 1.  Would using a meta recipe allow me to grab the E17 group keeping
> the individual application and library versions separate from E16?
> 2.  This isn't in line with the current paradigm...i.e KDE, XFCE, etc...right?
> 3.  Would this be better in a script?  Or is this a new paradigm...say
> Compile --group E17?

Hi Otto, sorry for the late reply!

That's the way we used to do with KDE and friends: grouping them all
with a single meta-recipe. The good thing on having a separate
installation is that both Compile and InstallPackage can be aware that
a given dependency, also used by Enlightenment, exists, just by
looking at its entry on /Programs.

Packages like Xorg, on the other hand, use the meta-recipe idea. So,
if something relies in a file shipped by the Xorg-Xlib recipe, for
example, this package's dependency becomes Xorg instead.

What kind of components are you grouping together with the
meta-recipe? Are them all specific parts of E17, or are you including
known programs too (xterm, libpng, etc)? In the former I see no
problems on using a meta recipe. The latter probably can have their
"known-dependencies" listed in the Dependencies file, while keeping
E17 specific parts in the meta recipe.

> P.S. The 013 release is great.

Thanks! Hope you enjoy it :-)

powered by /dev/dsp

More information about the gobolinux-users mailing list