[Gtkradiant] Bundled libraries

bebo_sudo bebo.sudo at gmail.com
Mon Apr 1 14:58:37 EDT 2013

Il 01/04/2013 18:46, Christopher ha scritto:
> Why not dynamically load the library instead of stripping the
> functions they provide?
> On Mon, Apr 1, 2013 at 12:12 PM, bebo_sudo <bebo.sudo at gmail.com> wrote:
>> Hi folks,
>> in my attempt to do the, by now famous, rpm for fedora, I bumped into the
>> embedded libraries, libpng and libjpeg.
>> The fedoraproject doesn't allow built-in libraries in rpm, so I have to
>> remove them, as said here by Hans de Goede:
>> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=836840#c15
>> The needed libraries will be required by the rpmbuild itself at the moment
>> of the install.
>> Now my question is: how to patch the sources to remove any sort of these
>> libs?
>> I tried to remove the most part of files in which I encountered the "png" or
>> "jpeg" words but I think I made some errors.
>> Here I uploaded my attempt of a patch: http://pastebin.com/iG4nDEWf
>> and here the exit status when I try to build the rpm:
>> http://pastebin.com/FY3f2rEA
>> How can I avoid scons to build these libraries?
>> Greetings,
>> bebo
>> _______________________________________________
>> Gtkradiant mailing list
>> Gtkradiant at icculus.org
>> http://icculus.org/mailman/listinfo/gtkradiant
> _______________________________________________
> Gtkradiant mailing list
> Gtkradiant at icculus.org
> http://icculus.org/mailman/listinfo/gtkradiant
Thank's for your reply.

I have to tell I'm not a programmer and I don't know exactly what 
"dinamically load" means.
I think the fedoraproject want packages done in this way because if 
every package would bundle in itself its libs, the fedora repositories 
would be very heavy.

Are there differences between the embedded version and the version i 
take from the fedora repos? didn't have the same functions?

If you want to contribute to packaging gtkradiant for fedora I will be 
glade to see you on bugzilla.

More information about the Gtkradiant mailing list