Re: Fwd: Re: Pango portability (or rather the lack of it)

• Previous message: Rui Miguel Silva Seabra: "Re: Release cycle (was Re: New development plans)"
• In reply to: Hubert Figuiere: "Re: Fwd: Re: Pango portability (or rather the lack of it)"
• Next in thread: Andrew Dunbar: "Re: Fwd: Re: Pango portability (or rather the lack of it)"
• Next in thread: Tomas Frydrych: "Re: Pango portability (or rather the lack of it)"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]

On Thu, 2002-04-25 at 22:09, Hubert Figuiere wrote:
> Pango depends on glib2 and gtk (but not in every cases). Not on Gome
> libs as far as I know.

As a result of rpm -e pango:
(...)
libpangox-1.0.so.0 is needed by gtk2-2.0.2.0.200204232133-0.snap.ximia
(...)

if they install gtk2, they have to have pango.

Hugs, rms

-- 
+ No matter how much you do, you never do enough -- unknown
+ Whatever you do will be insignificant,
| but it is very important that you do it -- Ghandi
+ So let's do it...?

• application/pgp-signature attachment: This is a digitally signed message part

• Next message: Paul Rohr: "Re: further notes on using Pango"
• Previous message: Rui Miguel Silva Seabra: "Re: Release cycle (was Re: New development plans)"
• In reply to: Hubert Figuiere: "Re: Fwd: Re: Pango portability (or rather the lack of it)"
• Next in thread: Andrew Dunbar: "Re: Fwd: Re: Pango portability (or rather the lack of it)"
• Next in thread: Tomas Frydrych: "Re: Pango portability (or rather the lack of it)"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu Apr 25 2002 - 18:40:15 EDT