From owner-cvs-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Dec 25 19:55:48 2011 Return-Path: Delivered-To: cvs-ports@FreeBSD.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7DE2A106566B; Sun, 25 Dec 2011 19:55:48 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from swills@FreeBSD.org) Received: from mouf.net (unknown [IPv6:2607:fc50:0:4400:216:3eff:fe69:33b2]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 092A48FC0C; Sun, 25 Dec 2011 19:55:47 +0000 (UTC) Received: from meatwad.mouf.net (cpe-024-162-230-236.nc.res.rr.com [24.162.230.236]) (authenticated bits=0) by mouf.net (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id pBPJtkEW072344 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-CAMELLIA256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT); Sun, 25 Dec 2011 14:55:46 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from swills@FreeBSD.org) Message-ID: <4EF77FC2.1060900@FreeBSD.org> Date: Sun, 25 Dec 2011 14:55:46 -0500 From: Steve Wills User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; FreeBSD amd64; en-US; rv:1.9.2.17) Gecko/20110531 Thunderbird/3.1.10 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Alexey Dokuchaev References: <201112241839.pBOIdPlh024053@repoman.freebsd.org> <20111225154525.GA43948@FreeBSD.org> <20111225163848.GA51484@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <20111225163848.GA51484@FreeBSD.org> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.1.2 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=KOI8-R Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Greylist: Sender succeeded SMTP AUTH, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.2.7 (mouf.net [204.109.58.86]); Sun, 25 Dec 2011 14:55:47 -0500 (EST) X-Virus-Scanned: clamav-milter 0.97.2 at mouf.net X-Virus-Status: Clean Cc: cvs-ports@FreeBSD.org, Bernhard Froehlich , cvs-all@FreeBSD.org, Chris Rees , ports-committers@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: ports/x11/kdelibs4 Makefile X-BeenThere: cvs-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: CVS commit messages for the ports tree List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 25 Dec 2011 19:55:48 -0000 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 12/25/11 11:38, Alexey Dokuchaev wrote: > On Sun, Dec 25, 2011 at 04:13:54PM +0000, Chris Rees wrote: >> On 25 Dec 2011 15:45, "Alexey Dokuchaev" wrote: >>> Hmm, this seems to go against common practice of preferring libungif to >>> giflib (i.e. more ports depend on libungif). Is the problem too >>> complicated to solve in a way so we stay with libungif (it's hard to see >>> what's exactly wrong from "avoid duplicate files" phrase)? Sorry that was a bit vague. The issue I was seeing was that x11/kde4 wouldn't package in my ports tinderbox because of the duplicate files going missing (pkg_delete error'ing out when uninstalling, I think). >> I believe it's to avoid conflicts between gif and ungif; it was pointed >> out that the patent issues no longer exist, so libgif is the 'preferred' >> solution. Technically there isn't a CONFLICTS between the two, although I believe there should be. I've filed a PR, but there are a number of ports that will be affected and so it hasn't been done yet. If we can get migrated to one or the other, we should be able to add the CONFLICTS. See below. > Per libungif's pkg-descr, it's not just being unencumbered by patents, but > also "implements a superset of that [giflib's] library's API". Regardless > of the possible API and patent issues, what makes libgif a 'preferred' > solution? > > I see it this way: if 100% of ports can be happy with "official" libgif, let > is be so (ditto for libungif). If libungif can do the job where giflib > cannot, (and to my understanding, considering all these years GIF patent was > in power, libungif was generally preferred to giflib, so the former is more > likely to work), libungif should remain de-facto GIF library for FreeBSD. > > Personally, I don't have any predilection to either libungif or giflib, but > I want to avoid spamming users' systems with two almost identical libraries > if one of them can suffice for all. I agree. All I know is that the maintainer of both (decke@, CC'd), told me that libgif is preferred and seemed to agree that the best ultimate solution is to migrate everything to one or the other. > ./danfe > > P.S. Yes, I am willing to bite the bullet and try to fix those ports that > do not play well with whatever be "FreeBSD official" GIF provider, as long > as only one stay; if both have to stay, we should compare the usage fraction > and leave the most popular in place. Switching from libungif to giflib just > for the sake of avoiding the conflict does not warrant it. I agree. I've already started a little work on this. Here's the list of ports that I have that have direct dependency on libungif: games/gracer editors/emacs editors/emacs-devel editors/emacs21 editors/emacs22 graphics/corona graphics/enfle graphics/evas-loader-gif graphics/exact-image graphics/gdal graphics/gnash graphics/gnash-devel graphics/ida graphics/imlib graphics/imlib2 graphics/libafterimage graphics/metapixel graphics/ming graphics/ocaml-images graphics/osg graphics/osg-devel graphics/p5-ming graphics/pencil graphics/py-ming graphics/show graphics/simage graphics/simpleviewer graphics/swftools japanese/ming java/kaffe mail/spamprobe mail/p5-FuzzyOcr mail/p5-FuzzyOcr-devel misc/wmweather+ multimedia/mencoder multimedia/mplayer net-im/kmess-kde4 net-mgmt/driftnet print/advi print/fontforge science/flounder textproc/gladtex www/ziproxy x11-toolkits/libgdiplus x11-toolkits/p5-Prima x11-wm/afterstep-stable x11-wm/libwraster x11-wm/windowmaker I've already got a patch for games/gracer. If you'd like to divide the work up, let me know which ones you'd like take. And if anyone else knows others that I've missed, let me know. Thanks, Steve -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.17 (FreeBSD) iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJO93/BAAoJEPXPYrMgexuhLxEH/0AgxrqrWBowgvpwOKTSJFKB rqPsNXxVe2ZyEFxuVPLZ19AGXICBWUMlYLN8d0H1DWSCdwx1DriLrq+DRoOhPA+X f0rT2PqKLEo922squZxxAGuzqqTDwunQzm0GnbDQmUWdKGndxW5YKB7LUgSv5hgH wzVlM3TxEnf60h9AL+4xfhNyyqXopDyxxfqdrRsUi4rQ4hlYnAM3BARi3QtzyC7w 0jcyK3C7HDC4uiWDgz+pcmvFS4Cj9KdsGeQmscSVdngs6hrxherao3CW5q42sgcR Yrocc8Fj64adgBhBw9kgWyaPEdOGgVf7N1+DfXvnZ5OtUtDt+rXFWwdzVEZJIjk= =mL2L -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----