From owner-freebsd-x11@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Apr 17 15:12:48 2007 Return-Path: X-Original-To: x11@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-x11@FreeBSD.ORG Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E842616A401; Tue, 17 Apr 2007 15:12:48 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from kris@obsecurity.org) Received: from elvis.mu.org (elvis.mu.org [192.203.228.196]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D3B2713C45D; Tue, 17 Apr 2007 15:12:48 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from kris@obsecurity.org) Received: from obsecurity.dyndns.org (elvis.mu.org [192.203.228.196]) by elvis.mu.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CB87E1A4D98; Tue, 17 Apr 2007 08:13:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: by obsecurity.dyndns.org (Postfix, from userid 1000) id A27ED51406; Tue, 17 Apr 2007 11:12:45 -0400 (EDT) Date: Tue, 17 Apr 2007 11:12:45 -0400 From: Kris Kennaway To: Michael Nottebrock Message-ID: <20070417151245.GC1004@xor.obsecurity.org> References: <200704051229.27994.lists@jnielsen.net> <00d201c78052$6b2af740$0d0aa8c0@dorfl> <200704171601.57014.lofi@freebsd.org> <200704171633.59007.lofi@freebsd.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="LwW0XdcUbUexiWVK" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200704171633.59007.lofi@freebsd.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.2i Cc: x11@freebsd.org, Andy Fawcett , kde@freebsd.org Subject: Re: [kde-freebsd] qt upgrade strangeness X-BeenThere: freebsd-x11@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: X11 on FreeBSD -- maintaining and support List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 17 Apr 2007 15:12:49 -0000 --LwW0XdcUbUexiWVK Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Tue, Apr 17, 2007 at 04:33:55PM +0200, Michael Nottebrock wrote: > > I dimly remember seeing that before - I don't think Qt/qmake can actual= ly > > handle a PREFIX-move cleanly and once the prefix has changed, it has to= be > > deinstalled *before* rebuilding it, or else this will happen. >=20 > Since I understand there will be an update script for the upcoming X.org= =20 > upheaval, this issue would be a prime candidate for handling it in such a= =20 > script. flz, lesi, what do you think? So far this is the only port that is claimed to require special treatment, the upgrade script isn't doing major surgery on other ports. I'd like to find a workaround that doesn't require it. It would be great if you could get involved in testing the upgrade yourself, we really need people like yourself to help test this kind of corner case. Kris --LwW0XdcUbUexiWVK Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQFGJOPtWry0BWjoQKURAr6eAKCPeDbcbT3w6hIUSYvhtyP1dHoKEACg9Luk iyVHvSorIs2Z5nw8tqsCrMI= =9qSb -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --LwW0XdcUbUexiWVK--