From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Jul 12 23:04:53 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ports@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 04B3716A4E0; Wed, 12 Jul 2006 23:04:53 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from brooks@lor.one-eyed-alien.net) Received: from lor.one-eyed-alien.net (12-207-12-9.client.mchsi.com [12.207.12.9]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CEC9243D4C; Wed, 12 Jul 2006 23:04:51 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from brooks@lor.one-eyed-alien.net) Received: from lor.one-eyed-alien.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by lor.one-eyed-alien.net (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id k6CN4mcd039037; Wed, 12 Jul 2006 18:04:48 -0500 (CDT) (envelope-from brooks@lor.one-eyed-alien.net) Received: (from brooks@localhost) by lor.one-eyed-alien.net (8.13.6/8.13.6/Submit) id k6CN4lnH039036; Wed, 12 Jul 2006 18:04:47 -0500 (CDT) (envelope-from brooks) Date: Wed, 12 Jul 2006 18:04:47 -0500 From: Brooks Davis To: John Merryweather Cooper Message-ID: <20060712230447.GA38540@lor.one-eyed-alien.net> References: <200607130024.18047.dejan.lesjak@ijs.si> <44B578EE.202@yahoo.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="45Z9DzgjV8m4Oswq" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <44B578EE.202@yahoo.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.11 Cc: ports@freebsd.org, Dejan Lesjak , freebsd-x11@freebsd.org Subject: Re: RFC: Merging X11BASE to LOCALBASE X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 12 Jul 2006 23:04:53 -0000 --45Z9DzgjV8m4Oswq Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Wed, Jul 12, 2006 at 05:34:22PM -0500, John Merryweather Cooper wrote: > Dejan Lesjak wrote: > >Hello, > > > >There were a couple of debates already concerning /usr/X11R6 as prefix f= or=20 > >X11 ports and a bunch of other ports that currently by default install= =20 > >there. Quite some people were, when creating a new port that depends on= =20 > >X11, wandering whether to put it in X11BASE or LOCALBASE. More than once= a=20 > >question of whether the prefix /usr/X11R6 should be just dropped or at= =20 > >least only retained for core X11 distribution. With the upcoming X.org 7= =2Ex=20 > >ports there is perhaps the opportunity to do the prefix merger along tha= t. > >Moving X11 prefix to LOCALBASE would simplify above dilemma. It would be= =20 > >also more similar to where linux distributions are going (at least Gento= o,=20 > >Debian and Fedora deprecated /usr/X11R6 in favour of /usr which, while= =20 > >not /usr/local is the location of where all packages install - depending= =20 > >on X11 or not). If I remember correctly from previous discussions, it=20 > >would be more convenient to people with separate mounts for installed=20 > >packages as well. /usr/local is also the default value for --prefix=20 > >configure option for X.org packages. > >So it is general intention to go with /usr/local or rather ${LOCALBASE} = as=20 > >prefix for X11 ports. If anyone feels that this is horribly wrong, pleas= e=20 > >speak up. > > > >On behalf of x11 team, > >Dejan > > =20 > What impact (if any) would the doubling or tripling of the number of=20 > files in ./bin have on searching along PATH? Would we be shooting=20 > ourselves in the foot if we did this? Since /usr/X11R6/bin is already in the default path I don't see how it would make any difference. -- Brooks --45Z9DzgjV8m4Oswq Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQFEtYAOXY6L6fI4GtQRArySAKC2L34orV4xECxOBaqJ0goRk0MK/gCfShet hUvxpyEyJ91yRCQrvEUYayY= =wBkm -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --45Z9DzgjV8m4Oswq--