From owner-freebsd-ports-bugs@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Apr 7 09:01:55 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports-bugs@hub.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D82AB16A4CE for ; Wed, 7 Apr 2004 09:01:55 -0700 (PDT) Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (freefall.freebsd.org [216.136.204.21]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B68EF43D1D for ; Wed, 7 Apr 2004 09:01:55 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from gnats@FreeBSD.org) Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (gnats@localhost [127.0.0.1]) i37G0gbv003055 for ; Wed, 7 Apr 2004 09:00:42 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from gnats@freefall.freebsd.org) Received: (from gnats@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i37G0gCH003054; Wed, 7 Apr 2004 09:00:42 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from gnats) Date: Wed, 7 Apr 2004 09:00:42 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <200404071600.i37G0gCH003054@freefall.freebsd.org> To: freebsd-ports-bugs@FreeBSD.org From: Michael Nottebrock Subject: Re: ports/64523: Make samba-libsmbclient subport of samba-devel X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports-bugs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list Reply-To: Michael Nottebrock List-Id: Ports bug reports List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 07 Apr 2004 16:01:56 -0000 The following reply was made to PR ports/64523; it has been noted by GNATS. From: Michael Nottebrock To: "Timur I. Bakeyev" Cc: freebsd-gnats-submit@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: ports/64523: Make samba-libsmbclient subport of samba-devel Date: Wed, 7 Apr 2004 17:49:20 +0200 --Boundary-02=_DMCdA3AprakmlzN Content-Type: text/plain; charset="koi8-r" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline On Wednesday 07 April 2004 17:22, Timur I. Bakeyev wrote: > >1.) samba-devel and samba-libsmbclient still conflict > >with each other, which > >doesn't make sense. Having a client library installed > >must not prevent people > >from installing the server. > > This is quite compleax question, on my opinion. The > problem with current approach is that samba-libsmbclient > installs the most simplistic version of library, bare > bones, I'd say. This can probably be optionalized in the samba-libsmbclient port. > My point to keep libsmbclient in samba-devel is the one, > mentioned above, plus expences of double compilation of > samba tree, which isn't so small. If everyone(who depend > on libsmbclient) thinks it's ok, we can get rid of client > library from samba-devel. We really have to at some point. For example with the current status quo, y= ou=20 cannot install samba-devel when you're using KDE - because kdebase depends = on=20 samba-libsmbclient (as it only uses client functionality) and with that=20 installed, the CONFLICTS prevents users from installing samba-devel. > >2.) The slave port has stylebugs (see ports/64393). > > Hm.. I've looked over the whole PR and didn't find > anything, in the slave port, that conflicts with the > statements there. Contrary, samba-devel itself has > problems with style and doesn't validate by portlint(but > thats a separate issue, that involves OPTIONS and > structure of bsd.ports.mk). > > Can you point me, what's wrong with the slave port on your > opinion. I can't - I guess I imagined the errors I saw, forget about it :-}. =2D-=20 ,_, | Michael Nottebrock | lofi@freebsd.org (/^ ^\) | FreeBSD - The Power to Serve | http://www.freebsd.org \u/ | K Desktop Environment on FreeBSD | http://freebsd.kde.org --Boundary-02=_DMCdA3AprakmlzN Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Description: signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQBAdCMDXhc68WspdLARApzWAJ9cUhOs/SHxlRRVwMdTeDIEdAEh0QCfeeBO RbvJ2Z1TKA2qXu+9Lu0XarI= =jRRt -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Boundary-02=_DMCdA3AprakmlzN--