Date: Thu, 08 Apr 1999 19:37:45 -0500 From: Jacques Vidrine <n@nectar.com> To: Chuck Robey <chuckr@mat.net> Cc: current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: /sys/boot, egcs vs. gcc, -Os Message-ID: <199904090037.TAA35590@spawn.nectar.com> In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.4.10.9904081920150.378-100000@picnic.mat.net> References: <Pine.BSF.4.10.9904081920150.378-100000@picnic.mat.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 8 April 1999 at 19:25, Chuck Robey <chuckr@mat.net> wrote: [snip] > And on top of that, there are about 5 top tracks of libs, each of these > 5 tracks (that have lots depending on them) has lived in both /usr/local > and in /usr/X11R6 in recent times, both leave ascii configuration files > behind (and in both sets of directories, depending on the age of the > older ports). Yes, I do find that very annoying. I'd like to see everything (including X) use one prefix. The next time that I install a system from scratch, I'll have everything under /opt (I use /usr/X11R6 and /opt right now) to see how it goes. I can't recall why we have /usr/X11R6, other than because of assumptions in lotsa X packages. > Just to make everything totally confused, because some > insane folks want to have multiple versions active concurrently, the > name of those config files, which exist in multiple places, have > multiple names. Insane? ``Though this be madness, yet there is a method in 't.'' If we were to remove all gtk ports but the latest (gtk12), as an example, then we would have to remove also approximately 34 ports that depend upon the older versions of GTK. > Each of the ports of the apps, which need all these > libs, have configuration scripts that go looking for all these misnamed > and misfiled config scripts, and those configuration scripts alway seem > to find the oldest and most out-of-date config script possible. AFAIK, all of the ports that depend upon gtk (again for example), correctly search for the version-dependant configuration script name (i.e. gtk10-config, gtk12-config ...). If there are those that do not, please send-pr them. If you have a better suggestion for handling this necessary complexity, I'd like to hear it. Upgrading the ports is hard enough without tilting at windmills. Jacques Vidrine / n@nectar.com / nectar@FreeBSD.org To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199904090037.TAA35590>