From owner-freebsd-ports Tue Oct 15 21:14:48 1996 Return-Path: owner-ports Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) id VAA05017 for ports-outgoing; Tue, 15 Oct 1996 21:14:48 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rich.isdn.bcm.tmc.edu (root@RICH.ISDN.BCM.TMC.EDU [128.249.250.34]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) with ESMTP id VAA04999; Tue, 15 Oct 1996 21:14:37 -0700 (PDT) Received: from richc.isdn.bcm.tmc.edu (root@richc.isdn.bcm.tmc.edu [128.249.250.37]) by rich.isdn.bcm.tmc.edu (8.7.5/8.6.12) with ESMTP id XAA11839; Tue, 15 Oct 1996 23:14:22 -0500 (CDT) Received: (rich@localhost) by richc.isdn.bcm.tmc.edu (8.7.5/8.6.12) id XAA25640; Tue, 15 Oct 1996 23:14:22 -0500 (CDT) Date: Tue, 15 Oct 1996 23:14:22 -0500 (CDT) Message-Id: <199610160414.XAA25640@richc.isdn.bcm.tmc.edu> From: Rich Murphey To: chuckr@glue.umd.edu CC: asami@FreeBSD.org, torstenb@FreeBSD.org, ports@FreeBSD.org In-reply-to: (message from Chuck Robey on Wed, 16 Oct 1996 00:04:31 -0400 (EDT)) Subject: Re: xpm static library Reply-to: rich@rich.isdn.bcm.tmc.edu Sender: owner-ports@FreeBSD.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk |From: Chuck Robey |> |Just let me jump in here a moment. All that stuff is controlled by |> |FreeBSD.cf, which we really ought to get some chance to tweak, you know. |> |Before it becomes a regular part of a distribution is the right time to |> |consider it. |> | |> |One possibility is to ask that a site.def file be sited in OUR |> |/usr/share/mk directory, so we could get our own meathooks on part of the |> |config. |> |> Yep, FreeBSD.cf would be the ideal place to '#define |> ForceNormalLib YES' specificly for FreeBSD. Would that |> fix it? Rich | |Yes and no. It won't fix it as long as the location of that file is |defined to be inside the XFree86 distribution, where our cvs can't touch |it. Would be kinda nice if either that file or site def (which is |currently in /usr/X11R6/lib/X11config and totally _empty_) were sited |somewhere accessible to our tree. Hmm.. like /etc? That particular location is used for other things like XF86Config, so there's a precedent of sorts. And since it's already used for a similar purpose by other OSes as well there's a chance it would be less surprising to them. |Personally, I would want some chance to mess with the contents of that |file by giving verbal input to XFree86 members, but not have that inside |our tree. I would have the site.def in our tree somewhere, where it being |empty or missing wouldn't kill things. There's no reason you couldn't search /etc first for site.def and /usr/X11R6/lib/X11/config last. Would that help? Rich