Date: Tue, 01 Jan 2008 15:28:34 -0500 From: Chuck Robey <chuckr@chuckr.org> To: Joe Marcus Clarke <marcus@FreeBSD.org> Cc: gnome@FreeBSD.org, Luis Medinas <lmedinas@gmail.com> Subject: Re: Brasero on FreeBSD Message-ID: <477AA272.3080501@chuckr.org> In-Reply-To: <1199214593.28014.46.camel@shumai.marcuscom.com> References: <1199159561.6089.2.camel@fermi> <1199214593.28014.46.camel@shumai.marcuscom.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Joe Marcus Clarke wrote: > On Tue, 2008-01-01 at 03:52 +0000, Luis Medinas wrote: >> Hi >> >> As a co-maintainer of Brasero i'm tempted to ask why FreeBSD hasn't >> brasero 0.7.0 on the ports tree. None of us are using FreeBSD sadly but >> we can work together to make it work better for FreeBSD if it isn't >> working atm. Please bump brasero. > > First, this is very encouraging. I love it when maintainers make an > effort to help port their application to another platform. Thank you. > > Now for the bad news. We have quite a few users that want to use > brasero on FreeBSD, but we haven't had anyone step up to fix the > problems. Admittedly, I offered to look into this a while ago, but fell > behind with non-FreeBSD work, and the FreeBSD hal port update. Here's > were we stand with brasero now: > > http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=ports/115240 : This looks > like a problem with brasero overriding PATH for a Linux-centric > environment. mkisofs is found in /usr/local/bin on FreeBSD. > Admittedly, I have not looked into the brasero code to determine if this > is the case, or if this problem is still relevant in 0.7.0. > > http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=ports/117364 : This is a bit > nastier. FreeBSD's cdrecord only supports the legacy bus,target,lun > notation. Our HAL exports this address via the block.freebsd.cam_path > property, and I hacked nautilus-cd-burner to support this property on > FreeBSD. > > If you have suggestions on these problems, I would be happy to get > brasero up to 0.7.0 and working properly on FreeBSD. I didn't know what brasero was, so I wewnt to their website. I found that the version number for their stable release is 0.5.2, while I see the ports is at 0.5.1. Is it normal, so something like gnome utils (that so many use) to follow the most recent version, of to follow the most recent *stable* version? Note I'm not being fascetious, I really don't know the answer, but maybe, if one would use the x11/gnome port as a guide, well, it's running at version 2.20.2, which I think (unless I misread their website) is their stable release ... but they didn't actually seem to make any distinction on that site, current versus stable. I still don't know, but I think that brasero shouldn't just be automatically be updated to the current version without deciding that, right? Or, should the port have a second one, a brasero-current, added? I know that either way, a update is needed, but that needed to be looked at, right? > Joe > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.4 (FreeBSD) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFHeqJyz62J6PPcoOkRAvI+AJ4vti44pUrrT0XUlkAX4VeMIWb96gCeOmZV S0DuBM4q/Ar9Z1cDxnaDF/k= =uMoU -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?477AA272.3080501>