Date: 10 Jan 2000 08:37:58 -0800 From: asami@FreeBSD.org (Satoshi - Ports Wraith - Asami) To: Will Andrews <andrews@TECHNOLOGIST.COM> Cc: "R. Imura" <imura@cs.titech.ac.jp>, andreas@FreeBSD.org, se@FreeBSD.org, ports@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: Qt/KDE/bsd.port.mk upgrade PRs imminent Message-ID: <vqcg0w5anmh.fsf@silvia.hip.berkeley.edu> In-Reply-To: Will Andrews's message of "Sat, 08 Jan 2000 12:37:11 -0500 (EST)" References: <XFMail.000108123711.andrews@TECHNOLOGIST.COM>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
* From: Will Andrews <andrews@TECHNOLOGIST.COM> * Good point.. however, it seems to me that any port that depends on kde * libraries will also depend on Qt, and thereby require USE_NEWGCC (through * bsd.port.mk). Although.. they would have to be patched to require the newer KDE * library (kdecore.3, kdeui.3, and so forth). Yes, this should all be committed at once. * Is there any reason why we don't have a "USE_KDE" switch in bsd.port.mk? Seems * appropriate. Lots of ports would use it. Every time a version bump is made to * the KDE 1.x libraries.. we'd have to modify all of them, too... Because the version doesn't bump that often? :) Also, different ports may require different parts (or languages) of kde. Or do you think it's ok to just always use kdelibs? * I didn't know there was a Qt 1.45.. Satoshi, I could send in another PR, and if * you prefer, can make it "qt145" instead of "qt14".. simpler job. BTW, when you * do a repo copy, does that involve copying the files and then patching, or does * it involving importing and then copying CVS-related files? I need to know * whether to provide a diff or a shar. Copying and then patching, so unless the new port looks nothing like the old one, a diff would be better. Satoshi To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-ports" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?vqcg0w5anmh.fsf>