From owner-freebsd-gnome@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Feb 25 16:33:03 2010 Return-Path: Delivered-To: gnome@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 10CA21065670; Thu, 25 Feb 2010 16:33:03 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from kwm@freebsd.org) Received: from viefep20-int.chello.at (viefep20-int.chello.at [62.179.121.40]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 20CD28FC15; Thu, 25 Feb 2010 16:33:01 +0000 (UTC) Received: from edge03.upcmail.net ([192.168.13.238]) by viefep20-int.chello.at (InterMail vM.8.01.02.00 201-2260-120-20100118) with ESMTP id <20100225163258.CDWJ3935.viefep20-int.chello.at@edge03.upcmail.net>; Thu, 25 Feb 2010 17:32:58 +0100 Received: from [192.168.0.105] ([80.56.73.45]) by edge03.upcmail.net with edge id mGYx1d00x0ydU7k03GYy9b; Thu, 25 Feb 2010 17:32:58 +0100 X-SourceIP: 80.56.73.45 From: Koop Mast To: "varga.michal@gmail.com" In-Reply-To: <3f1fd1ea1002250754i1b9f1096ma8d3b80b168f27f0@mail.gmail.com> References: <3f1fd1ea1002250318o582bbd5ua5a695e3af5e3cb9@mail.gmail.com> <4B867F67.50409@freebsd.org> <3f1fd1ea1002250713v29671732i57d89ad0f666d1b@mail.gmail.com> <1267112635.4439.27.camel@headache.rainbow-runner.nl> <3f1fd1ea1002250754i1b9f1096ma8d3b80b168f27f0@mail.gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 25 Feb 2010 17:33:59 +0100 Message-ID: <1267115639.4439.59.camel@headache.rainbow-runner.nl> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.28.2 FreeBSD GNOME Team Port Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Cloudmark-Analysis: v=1.1 cv=QdBLAgre7c8frQzz4hk/dGhGis9nWbpJ/4YwYnWyUP8= c=1 sm=0 a=GBmzoHRKrD8A:10 a=pGLkceISAAAA:8 a=6I5d2MoRAAAA:8 a=D0zoeDBzDt5rg4nMeA8A:9 a=ZPSWBHaJBRFps_EHdSIA:7 a=vySmJkEEyPAMcJDYJ45Uo_qUzBIA:4 a=MSl-tDqOz04A:10 a=SV7veod9ZcQA:10 a=HpAAvcLHHh0Zw7uRqdWCyQ==:117 Cc: gnome@freebsd.org, Joe Marcus Clarke Subject: Re: marcuscom and www/epiphany-extensions X-BeenThere: freebsd-gnome@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: GNOME for FreeBSD -- porting and maintaining List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 25 Feb 2010 16:33:03 -0000 On Thu, 2010-02-25 at 16:54 +0100, varga.michal@gmail.com wrote: > On Thu, Feb 25, 2010 at 4:43 PM, Koop Mast wrote: > > On Thu, 2010-02-25 at 16:13 +0100, varga.michal@gmail.com wrote: > >> On Thu, Feb 25, 2010 at 2:47 PM, Joe Marcus Clarke wrote: > >> > On 2/25/10 6:18 AM, varga.michal@gmail.com wrote: > >> >> Hello guys, > >> >> > >> >> it's been quite some months into the 2.29 development cycle, and there > >> >> is still no www/epiphany-extensions on marcuscom to be seen. Is there > >> >> something wrong that prevents it from being ported, or it's just an > >> >> oversight / lack of manpower? (In that case, I could do it.) > >> > > >> > As far as I know, it's an oversight. I didn't notice an update. kwm, > >> > avl, or ahze may have tried to build it, and ran into problems, but I > >> > was not made aware. If you want to do the port, that would be great. > >> > > >> > >> Well, while generating temporary plist, I noticed that > >> epiphany-extensions actually doesn't honor PREFIX, probably because of > >> this line in configure: > >> > >> EPIPHANY_EXTENSIONS_DIR="$($PKG_CONFIG --variable=extensionsdir > >> epiphany-$_epiphany_api_version)" > >> > >> ..which obviously points to: > >> > >> > pkg-config --variable=extensionsdir epiphany-2.29 > >> /usr/local/lib/epiphany/2.29/extensions > >> > >> ..where libraries get installed, no matter of PREFIX. Also from the > >> quick glance it seems to me that the same issue is present in the > >> current 2.28.x port, which strikes me odd as I was under impression > >> that tinderbox runs tend to catch those. > >> > >> Anyway - what is the correct way to solve this, or possibly - am I > >> missing something in the big picture? > >> > >> m. > > > > Tinderbox will not catch this, because it uses the same prefix for > > epiphany and epiphany-extensions. About the lack of updates to this > > port, marcus is correct. It just fell though the cracks. Now that is > > known we missed a port, one of us will fix that soonish. Or do you want > > to do the work? > > > Technically I already did, actually it seems there are just minor > changes from 2.28. Though as a personal preference, I'd like to see > the prefix issue fixed first, but I'm not aware of any other port > currently that deals with this, so I'm not sure what's the correct > approach. Any ideas, or pointers? Seems hacking EPIPHANY_EXTENSIONS_DIR in configure is the only way to fix this. I'm not really bothered with this, since epiphany and the extension ports are installed in the same prefix. I'm not really bothered by it, there are some more ports that have this behavior. I guess I got used to it. But back to the matter at hand. Can you post the diff for the ports update, or do you want to try to fix the problem above first? -Koop > m. > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-gnome@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-gnome > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-gnome-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" >