Date: Fri, 9 Apr 1999 07:51:15 -0700 From: Rich Morin <rdm@cfcl.com> To: freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: WWW_SITE variable Message-ID: <v04020a14b333c0983d6e@Untitled> In-Reply-To: <199904090740.AAA98824@silvia.hip.berkeley.edu> References: <Pine.HPP.3.96.990408102123.17672T-100000@hp9000.chc-chimes.com> (message from Bill Fumerola on Thu, 8 Apr 1999 10:35:56 -0400 (EDT)) <Pine.HPP.3.96.990408102123.17672T-100000@hp9000.chc-chimes.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Satoshi sez: >... We have been putting homepages in >pkg/DESCR for years. I don't see any need in adding yet another knob >to an already solved problem (which unsolves part of it...for >instance, how is the package user supposed to see it?). Although your point is well taken, there is a significant difference between machine-readable, tagged data (as found in the Makefile or in, say, an XML or Boulder I/O file) and raw (often chaotic) text. I'm not sure what the answer is, but a compromise of some sort may be in order. Would you be willing to consider a pkg/XML file with a set of defined tags? I would simply suggest a more precisely formatted DESCR file, along the lines of the "0.doc" files I used in "PTF for UNIX", but I don't see folks being willing to follow rigorous editing standards. An XML file, in contrast, is a separate, mechanically-checkable document. A script can determine whether it is complete, snytactically correct, etc. And, of course, the XML could be frobbed automagically into other forms, to satisfy particular needs for user access. -r -- Rich Morin: rdm@cfcl.com, +1 650-873-7841, http://www.ptf.com/~rdm Prime Time Freeware: info@ptf.com, +1 408-433-9662, http://www.ptf.com MacPerl: http://www.ptf.com/macperl, http://www.ptf.com/ptf/products/MPPE MkLinux: http://www.mklinux.apple.com, http://www.ptf.com/ptf/products/MKLP To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-ports" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-ports Fri Apr 9 14:32:56 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Received: from gauntlet2b.bridge.com (ns2.bridge.com [159.43.254.220]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0F6B615EA6; Fri, 9 Apr 1999 13:52:32 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from DDeatherage@bridge.com) Received: by gauntlet2b.bridge.com; id KAA24533; Fri, 9 Apr 1999 10:22:20 -0500 (CDT) Received: from dns1srv.bridge.com(167.76.56.13) by gauntlet2b.bridge.com via smap (4.1) id xma024427; Fri, 9 Apr 99 10:22:13 -0500 Received: from eximcx2.bridge.com (eximcx2.bridge.com [167.76.56.15]) by dns1srv.bridge.com (8.7.6/8.7.3) with ESMTP id KAA12981; Fri, 9 Apr 1999 10:22:12 -0500 (CDT) Received: by eximcx2.bridge.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2448.0) id <2N26130A>; Fri, 9 Apr 1999 10:25:18 -0500 Message-ID: <B100EA3C880BD211B6150000F870AE9015499A@EXCHKC3> From: "Deatherage, David" <DDeatherage@bridge.com> To: "'Joel Ray Holveck'" <joelh@gnu.org>, Steve Price <sprice@hiwaay.net> Cc: Peter Jeremy <peter.jeremy@auss2.alcatel.com.au>, current@FreeBSD.ORG, ports@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: RE: emacs* broken in -current (was Re: Vtable thunks with egcs) Date: Fri, 9 Apr 1999 10:19:21 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2448.0) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Sender: owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org I've found where this problem is coming from. It's in emacs20.3/src/s/freebsd.h. It sets a macro called BSD_SYSTEM based upon the version number contained in __FreeBSD__, checking for 1, 2 and 3. Of course, -current uses 4. I have found that you can check for __FreeBSD__ >= 3, and it will work, but this feels a bit like a hack. I've never updated a port, so I can either get some instruction from someone to put in a patch, or let someone else do it. David Deatherage -----Original Message----- From: Joel Ray Holveck [mailto:joelh@gnu.org] Sent: Thursday, April 08, 1999 9:18 PM To: Steve Price Cc: Peter Jeremy; current@FreeBSD.ORG; ports@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: emacs* broken in -current (was Re: Vtable thunks with egcs) > You are absolutely right. I just tried the new version of emacs > that I built on my pre-egcs box and it doesn't work on that box > either. This definitely doesn't appear to be anything caused by > changing to egcs. Not that it matters much but for grins I just > built/installed the xemacs port and it _does_ appear to work. I've been having no problems with an Emacs 20.3 and X11R6 built in October on a -current system from April 6. (The Emacs is ELF, and built from my own sources instead of the port.) I'd like to track this down; could people give me more info privately? rms is looking at releasing a mostly bugfix Emacs, possibly tommorow, but it may be another month (he's about to leave town). I haven't been watching the changes; there may be some X-related fixes in there. Cheers, joelh -- Joel Ray Holveck - joelh@gnu.org Fourth law of programming: Anything that can go wrong wi sendmail: segmentation violation - core dumped To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-ports" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?v04020a14b333c0983d6e>