From owner-freebsd-ports Tue Apr 20 17:45: 1 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Received: from hub.lovett.com (hub.lovett.com [38.155.241.2]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A0B4114D9A for ; Tue, 20 Apr 1999 17:44:55 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from ade@lovett.com) Received: from ade by hub.lovett.com with local (Exim 2.12 #1) id 10Zl5t-000NvO-00; Tue, 20 Apr 1999 19:42:25 -0500 Date: Tue, 20 Apr 1999 19:42:25 -0500 From: Ade Lovett To: Bill Fumerola Cc: ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: gtk versions Message-ID: <19990420194225.E90842@remarq.com> References: <19990420124051.B55954@area51.fremont.ca.us> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Mailer: Mutt 0.95.4i In-Reply-To: ; from Bill Fumerola on Tue, Apr 20, 1999 at 12:54:32PM -0400 Sender: owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org On Tue, Apr 20, 1999 at 12:54:32PM -0400, Bill Fumerola wrote: > > Lots of ports only work with certain versions, though I've been heard > making threats to remove gtk10, gtk11-devel and BROKEN every port that > doesn't work with what's left. Do it. Please. Along with all the kde stuff (given that kde11) is there. IMHO, given that multiple instances of gtk/glib occasionally interact badly with ports and non-ports software, and that the 1.2.1 versions of both are relatively stable (for some weird definition of stable), it seems to make much more sense to temporarily lose a few ports in the interests of keep a system sane. -aDe -- Ade Lovett, RemarQ Communities, Inc., San Jose, CA. mailto:ade@remarq.com http://www.remarq.com To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-ports" in the body of the message