From owner-freebsd-gnome@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Jul 13 22:22:56 2005 Return-Path: X-Original-To: gnome@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-gnome@FreeBSD.ORG Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BC48916A41C for ; Wed, 13 Jul 2005 22:22:56 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from mezz7@cox.net) Received: from lakermmtao08.cox.net (lakermmtao08.cox.net [68.230.240.31]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2FE5643D45 for ; Wed, 13 Jul 2005 22:22:56 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from mezz7@cox.net) Received: from mezz.mezzweb.com ([68.103.32.140]) by lakermmtao08.cox.net (InterMail vM.6.01.04.00 201-2131-118-20041027) with ESMTP id <20050713222254.BRMJ19415.lakermmtao08.cox.net@mezz.mezzweb.com>; Wed, 13 Jul 2005 18:22:54 -0400 To: "Mikhail Teterin" References: <200507130346.j6D3keOm019090@blue.virtual-estates.net> <200507131810.29307.Mikhail.Teterin@murex.com> Message-ID: Date: Wed, 13 Jul 2005 17:24:16 -0500 From: "Jeremy Messenger" Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; delsp=yes; charset=utf-8 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <200507131810.29307.Mikhail.Teterin@murex.com> User-Agent: Opera M2/8.01 (Linux, build 1204) Cc: gnome@freebsd.org Subject: Re: editors/abiword-devel -- 2.3.2 is now available X-BeenThere: freebsd-gnome@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: GNOME for FreeBSD -- porting and maintaining List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 13 Jul 2005 22:22:56 -0000 On Wed, 13 Jul 2005 17:10:29 -0500, Mikhail Teterin wrote: > середа 13 липень 2005 17:49, Jeremy Messenger Ви написали: >> > There would be no harm in extracting these, but there is a danger, >> that >> > now or in later releases something may include a header from the >> bundled >> > copy of one of the packages (PACKAGE), while still linking with the >> > -lPACKAGE installed by the PACKAGE port. >> >> I think it's good idea, but remove abiword-plugins from the EXTERNALS. > > Why bother extracting abiword-plugins, when it is not needed? Aren't the > plugins installed by their own port? > >> png.4 -> png.5, you still have to rebuild it anyway because of abiword >> will be still linking to libpng.so.4. > > I am sorry, I can not parse the above statement. My point -- as you seem > to > have missed it -- is that a user, who already has libpng.so.4 installed, > should NOT be forced by the abiword build to upgrade his png port. > > If you disagree and think, she/he should be forced to do so, please say: > "yes"... Yes. > Note, I'm talking about _package_ building -- that is not going to be > affected > by the change I propose _at all_. > >> So, force it to rebuild abiword will get it to link on libpng.so.5. I >> rather to keep them in Makefile as what it's now, it's easier to grep >> in >> ports tree for know which need to be change and bump. > > You can still grep for ``png''. Better yet, use the INDEX file. Having > png.5 > there does not help you _anyway_ -- the png port has already gone through > several upgrades without changing the major number. grep for 'png' isn't good enough, 'png.5' is bettter. What make you think everybody have the INDEX? I don't have any here. > So, there is no advantage in keeping the shared library numbers there, > but > there is a significant disadvantage -- the users are required to upgrade > all > changed dependencies, whenever they want to build abiword. I am expecting them to. People that keep old stuff and build new source that depend on old stuff cause a lot of problems, so force the habit of it to upgrade all new dependencies before you install anything new in port is good. Cheers, Mezz > -mi -- mezz7@cox.net - mezz@FreeBSD.org FreeBSD GNOME Team http://www.FreeBSD.org/gnome/ - gnome@FreeBSD.org