From owner-freebsd-ports Fri Nov 30 10: 9:36 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Received: from leviathan.inethouston.net (leviathan.inethouston.net [66.64.12.249]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 00FC037B419; Fri, 30 Nov 2001 10:09:26 -0800 (PST) Received: by leviathan.inethouston.net (Postfix, from userid 1001) id 98E31407587; Fri, 30 Nov 2001 12:09:29 -0600 (CST) Date: Fri, 30 Nov 2001 12:09:29 -0600 From: "David W. Chapman Jr." To: Cyrille Lefevre Cc: "David W. Chapman Jr." , Jochem Kossen , Dinesh Nair , Tom Fischer , FreeBSD-Stable , FreeBSD-Ports Subject: Re: -current vs. -stable port tree (was Re: linux-base 6.2 vs linux-base 7) Message-ID: <20011130180929.GE24980@leviathan.inethouston.net> Reply-To: "David W. Chapman Jr." Mail-Followup-To: Cyrille Lefevre , "David W. Chapman Jr." , Jochem Kossen , Dinesh Nair , Tom Fischer , FreeBSD-Stable , FreeBSD-Ports References: <20011125211058.A628@jochem.dyndns.org> <20011125213815.GA16500@leviathan.inethouston.net> <20011125230111.A24090@jochem.dyndns.org> <20011125222422.GA17212@leviathan.inethouston.net> <20011125233536.A24348@jochem.dyndns.org> <20011125230612.GB17212@leviathan.inethouston.net> <00c201c17625$8c4febc0$91e5c6d4@cybercable.fr> <004c01c17628$6bd0cce0$d800a8c0@inethouston.net> <008601c176d3$229d5d80$91e5c6d4@cybercable.fr> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <008601c176d3$229d5d80$91e5c6d4@cybercable.fr> User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.23.2i X-Operating-System: FreeBSD 4.4-STABLE i386 Sender: owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.org > maybe it is better to run staroffice60 under linux_base-7, but, IMHO, > if it > works under linux_base, that is the way to go until linux_base-7 is > fixed. It can't be fixed until I know the problems with it. > > > also works w/ linux_base, so, why not just switching it to use > > > linux_base > > > instead of linux_base-7 and to switch all linux ports to > > > linux_base-7 when they will be right to use it. the *right* > > > alternative, of course, > > > > They can use it with little modification. Most only require you > > changing the dependency in the Makefile > > why this is not done until linux_base-7 is fixed (read the RH shared > libs). Who knows if it will get fixed. > how about changing : > > DEPENDS= .../linux_base-7 > > by something like this : > > .if defined(WANT_LINUX_BASE_7) > FETCH_DEPENDS= > ${LINUXBASE}/usr/X11R6/lib/libXrender.so.1.0:${PORTSDIR}/emulators/lin > ux_base-7 > BUILD_DEPENDS= > ${LINUXBASE}/usr/X11R6/lib/libXrender.so.1.0:${PORTSDIR}/emulators/lin > ux_base-7 > .else > USE_LINUX= yes > .endif > > so, anybody would be happy, no ? That's one option, but that doesn't appear to be the path that I was told would be taken on this project. > > > > would be to fix linux_base-7 to be linux_base compatible... but > > > nobody care and everybody seems to considere normal what's > > > happen !!! > > > > Its not that linux_base-7 isn't "linux_base" compatible its that > > redhat 7 has a shared lib bug. We will have to use some of > > linux_base6's libc5 for > > are you saying that RH7 users can't run netscape 4.79 and so ? No, you can symlink libstdc++ that netscape is looking for to what exists > > those ports which actually require it, but we can't even get a > > grasp on what doesn't work under linux_base7 because we can't get > > enough details about what doesn't work. Most people just say "it > > doesn't work, linux_base-7 sucks". The reality is that > > linux_base-6 will go away because we are > > it is the case, no ;-) From what I've been hearing linux-base(6.x) is > < close to being removed. > my opinion is that we don't have to jump to something which works in > one > case and fails in all others. if that happen, it is preferable to > stay as is until > everything work fine w/ the new things. this has a name, QUALITY and > doing things the way "you" made it is the wrong way. it is a real > pain > to not have -current, -stable and -release port tree to avoid such > problems. > It can be a pain, but we cannot blame that for not making progress. Most important things work under linux_base-7. I only have one report that someone can't get staroffice to work under linux_base-7. Where are all these problems you are talking about. I can't fix them if I don't have details. -- David W. Chapman Jr. dwcjr@inethouston.net Raintree Network Services, Inc. dwcjr@freebsd.org FreeBSD Committer To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-ports" in the body of the message