rawhide report: 20060524 changes

[Bill Nottingham]

Tomasz Kłoczko (kloczek at zie.pg.gda.pl) said: 
> Dnia 24-05-2006, śro o godzinie 12:37 -0400, Bill Nottingham napisał(a):
> [..]
> > It was linked statically. Static glib libs went away, so....
> 
> OK. Next round .. why have (literaly) *one* binary (ppp-watch) which
> uses now shared libglib must affect glib ?
> Is not better rewrite this tool for not use glib ? or what so big
> performs ppp-watch where using glib is neccessary ? is it realy so hard
> rewrite this for not use glib ?

How does glib in /lib change things in a bad way?  (Realistically,
by having it shared in PAM, etc., it saves memory....)

This also enables using other things earlier in the boot process,
such as d-bus, hal, NM, etc.

Bill