Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2007 13:38:48 -0600 From: "Jeremy Messenger" <mezz7@cox.net> To: "Chuck Robey" <chuckr@chuckr.org> Cc: freebsd-multimedia@freebsd.org Subject: Re: linux-flashplayer running Message-ID: <op.t3nfiypl9aq2h7@mezz.mezzweb.com> In-Reply-To: <476AA47A.9020108@chuckr.org> References: <4769908E.5080008@chuckr.org> <op.t3mcvdha9aq2h7@mezz.mezzweb.com> <476AA47A.9020108@chuckr.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, 20 Dec 2007 11:20:58 -0600, Chuck Robey <chuckr@chuckr.org> wrote: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > Jeremy Messenger wrote: >> On Wed, 19 Dec 2007 15:43:42 -0600, Chuck Robey <chuckr@chuckr.org> >> wrote: >> >> Oh, I'm in trouble now. I was getting a bit frustrated, because all the >> different names that my browsers hide under, and the fact that 2 other >> items >> confuse things: >> >> 1) the config dirs aren't always named after the program, and >> >>> Please complain it to the developers that create this program. It >>> wasn't >>> our idea. >> >> 2) the G_D_ ports often installed things into /usr/local/ even for linux >> things, and other times into /compat, and that terribly screws things >> up. >> >>> I don't know what 'G_D_ ports' is. > > Sorry, it's not my job to interpret, and it's rather small of you to > think so > (LOL). > >> >> Why am I complaining? Because now, for Linux-firefox, I do have the >> flashplayer.9 working, but with all the screwing around I couldn't >> duplicate >> it. The problem was initially the flashplayer, because the version >> in ports >> no longer even exists. I went to the Adobe site, and just got the >> latest. >> Then, the version of libdl that Linux-firefox wants is not only >> different >> thanthe version that the flashplayer wants, they (I think) aren't always >> looking in the same dir for it. >> >> Whatever, it CAN be done, because I did it. >> >> Boy, I wish that the portsmeisters would (once and for all, plublicly) >> decide >> that linux libs have to install into the /compat/linux tree. If they >> would go >> on record for that, I would begin fixing ports to obey it. Can't do >> that now. >> >>> I see all Linux libraries that I have installed are in /compat/linux/* >>> by ports tree. If it doesn't in your case, then please complain to the >>> right maintainer. > > Actually (and I have complained about it recently, but you must have > missed > it) you assertion that all ports follow thatplacement rule is absolutely > false. How did you happen to come to that conclusion? Because you saw > one do > that? Or, because you found some written rule, and you assumed it was > being > followed? You need to be at least a little more thorough in checking the > truth, when making these statements, because it's being flouted by more > than > just a few Linux ports. I work with Linux ports a lot in the past. I did some help on linux-gtk2, linux-fontconfig or linux-freetype, acrobat and a few etc to test, report and suggest to tweak. Current, I am maintaining linux-opera and used to maintain linux-aspell. Put Linux libraries in /compat/linux makes sense and is correct way to me. # cd /usr/ports/textproc/linux-aspell/ # make -V PREFIX /compat/linux # cd ../../x11-toolkits/linux-gtk2/ # make -V PREFIX /compat/linux # cd ../../x11-fonts/linux-fontconfig/ # make -V PREFIX /compat/linux As you have pointed 'more ports', my suggest still stands by contact to the right maintainers and explain to them the reasons why put in /compat/linux is best way to do. > Anyhow, what I was after was getting the folks who have the say so > (those in > ports control, and also ports committers) to make a public decision that > the > method of file layout i am asking for is in fact the only one that is > approved. Like I say in my post, if this were put into a post, I would > point > to it, when I get busy correcting various ports which currently do not > follow > that rule. I need the public support before I try to correct things. > I'm > willing to do the work, but not willing to fight the battle, so things > will > remain the way they are until I get a ruling on this. Ok, I am sure that most of us are looking forward for your patches. >>> Not single of your complains have to do with freebsd-multimedia@. > > Is implementing Flash on Linux-firefox a multimedia topic? I think so, > and if > this request isn't acted upon, sooner or later, things will not be > improved > (at least not by me). I am just point you to contact to the correct maintainer to get better result. A few of your emails don't get good result because you didn't contact to the maintainers. If you send to multimedia@ plus CC maintainer and I will silence. Q: With your #1 complain, what can we do when the developers decided to have different name of config? A: Nothing, all you can do is to request to the developers to see if they can make changes. Q: With your #2 complain, how can non-maintainer can do? A: Nothing, all you can do is to contact to the maintainers and make some request. There is rule that non-maintainer can't commit other ports without permission. If they disagree, ask @freebsd-emulation to see if they can help you to get maintainers' mind change. > I don't know why you're so angry, but I don't think anything *I* did is > the cause. Nah, I am not angry. Don't know why you think that way. I am not very good on English, so maybe it's why. Cheers, Mezz >>> Cheers, >>> Mezz >> > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- > Version: GnuPG v2.0.4 (FreeBSD) > Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org > > iD8DBQFHaqR6z62J6PPcoOkRAqm4AJ4gU/4CGsKO4n4QAnG2MT5fVPas1ACbBWx2 > 2WXLKBm/AeWr1e/60NTtr8Q= > =9pZn > -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- mezz7@cox.net - mezz@FreeBSD.org FreeBSD GNOME Team - FreeBSD Multimedia Hat (ports, not src) http://www.FreeBSD.org/gnome/ - gnome@FreeBSD.org http://wiki.freebsd.org/multimedia - multimedia@FreeBSD.org
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?op.t3nfiypl9aq2h7>