On Sat, Nov 02, 2002 at 10:56:19PM +0000, Alan Cox wrote:
> On Sat, 2002-11-02 at 21:57, Patrick Finnegan wrote:
> > On 2 Nov 2002, Alan Cox wrote:
> >
> > > On Sat, 2002-11-02 at 20:36, Dr. David Alan Gilbert wrote:
> > > > Oh please....
> > > > Wouldn't it be more helpful to iron the (few) small glitches out of the
> > > > qt based one than write a new one just because you don't happen to like
> > > > the library?
> > >
> > > Lota of installations have gtk but don't have qt.
> >
> > And a lot of installations have QT but not GTK... This feels like a vi vs
> > emacs discussion.
>
> It sort of is. The difference being its "do I send you a vi macro or an
> emacs macro", and the obvious answer in this case being that if someone
> wants go write both then we all win.
It's definitely not. The current solution is simply a denial of service
attack, at moment Qt is _required_ for a build, not an optional frontend:
[0]--(16:26:00)-(root@stefan)-(/.localvol000/src/kernel/x/linux-2.5.45)-> make oldconfig
*
* Unable to find the QT installation. Please make sure that the
* QT development package is correctly installed and the QTDIR
* environment variable is set to the correct location.
*
make[1]: *** [scripts/kconfig/.tmp_qtcheck] Fehler 1
make: *** [scripts/kconfig/conf] Fehler 2
[2]--(16:26:05)-(root@stefan)-(/.localvol000/src/kernel/x/linux-2.5.45)->
This should not happen. Anyway, Roman did a good job.
--ciao - Stefan - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Nov 07 2002 - 22:00:31 EST