Re: mtools
On Tue, 28 Sep 1999, David Weinehall wrote:
> On Tue, 28 Sep 1999, Dale Scheetz wrote:
>
> [snip]
>
> > Guys, guys, guys... This is a discussion that was had quite a while ago,
> > and which lead to the creation of xlib6. The whole point was that it was
> > unnecessary glut to include a console version _and_ an X aware version of
> > packages like emacs (and others), when a small library could provide all
> > that was necessary to make a single program both console and X compatible.
> > xfree86-common is simply a recent way to remove the architectural
> > independent pieces from xlib6 and provide them in an independent fashion.
>
> This is ok with me for stuff like emacs (eventhough I'd really become
> aggressive if someone removed the vim-tty package.), but when it comes to
> mtools, it's only one single file; a daemon (floppyd, if I'm not all
> wrong) that needs xlib6g. It'd be simple to extract this daemon from
> mtools and create an extra package with just this file, and make this file
> recommended by mtools, and make mtools required by the extra-package.
>
I agree it seems unnatural that something as fundamental as mtools depends
on xlib6g, be it small or not.
*But* in this case, it seems hard to avoid. As I understand it, the
*whole* mtools package makes 'parasitic' use of the X protocol
(in fact of an existing X connection) to give authenticated access to
remote floppy drives. Floppyd is the server, and most or all of the other
commands can act as clients. So the whole package has to be compiled with
or without X.
Bj"orn Brill <brill@fs.math.uni-frankfurt.de>
Frankfurt am Main, Germany
Reply to: