duncan.coutts at worc.ox.ac.uk
Wed Oct 25 07:30:40 EDT 2006
On Tue, 2006-10-24 at 21:45 -0500, Brian Smith wrote:
> (sorry, I responded to the wrong list)
> On 10/24/06, Duncan Coutts
> <duncan.coutts at worc.ox.ac.uk> wrote:
> On the other hand, in Gtk2Hs I know one case where we do this.
> We have a
> Graphics.UI.Gtk.Cairo api module that is only included if Gtk
> was built
> against Cairo. In any case it could be faked by using cpp to
> just not
> export anything rather than not having the module exposed at
> all. So
> it's not clear that it's worth banning. Or maybe making it
> harder is worth it so that people don't get in the habit.
> Couldn't you split this into Gtk and Gtk-Cairo packages, where the
> latter is only built if Cairo is available?
Yes I could and that's probably the right thing to do.
> Similarly, in your GUI example, couldn't you have seperate foo and
> foo-gui packages, and only build the foo-gui package if the GUI
> libraries are available?
I'm not so sure about that one.
> Otherwise, how can you say "I depend on the Gtk package being built
> with Cairo support" and "I depend on the GUI portion of the foo
More information about the cabal-devel