From owner-freebsd-ports Tue Feb 4 11:54: 6 2003 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 D656E37B401; Tue, 4 Feb 2003 11:54:03 -0800 (PST) Received: from haystack.lclark.edu (haystack.lclark.edu [149.175.1.2]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 210B144152; Tue, 4 Feb 2003 11:50:42 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from anholt@FreeBSD.org) Received: from [149.175.30.191] ([149.175.30.191]) by haystack.lclark.edu (SAVSMTP 3.0.0.44) with SMTP id M2003020411452204146 ; Tue, 04 Feb 2003 11:45:22 -0800 Subject: Re: [kde-freebsd] Re: cvs commit: ports/x11/kdebase3 Makefile From: Eric Anholt To: Andy Fawcett Cc: Mikhail Teterin , Alexey Dokuchaev , Ollivier Robert , kde@FreeBSD.ORG, ports@FreeBSD.ORG In-Reply-To: <200302042037.03489.andy@athame.co.uk> References: <200302031235.h13CZwGB073669@repoman.freebsd.org> <20030204115646.GA95958@regency.nsu.ru> <200302041209.31495.mi+mx@aldan.algebra.com> <200302042037.03489.andy@athame.co.uk> Content-Type: text/plain Organization: Message-Id: <1044388064.615.41.camel@leguin> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.2.0 Date: 04 Feb 2003 11:47:45 -0800 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.org On Tue, 2003-02-04 at 10:36, Andy Fawcett wrote: > On Tuesday 04 February 2003 19:09, Mikhail Teterin wrote: > > [ Moved to -ports, -kde ] > > [Talking about Xft2, and speaking for myself, not kde@] > > > There are two substantial benefits in hacking it into XFree86-4-libs: > > > > . the usual X-clients (XTerm, etc.) will use it too, > > reducing run-time RAM usage, by sharing more libraries > > with Qt-based programs; > > . none of the Xft2 aware software will need the -lXft to -lXft2 > > and Xft.h to Xft2.h patching -- the Mozilla with whatever > > GNOME/GTK will just work. > > > > Kind of like the freetype2 dependency currently in XFree86-4-libs... > > The only reason not to do it, IMHO -- Eric's call -- is that 4.3.0 > > may be out soon... > > And, IMO, we should wait for it to be there, to save quite a few > hassles. Why patch several ports to handle the current (broken) > situation, when they would need to be unpatched once 4.3.0 is out? Because I don't see 4.3.0 as necessarily being the time for the unrenaming to happen. I would stop/fix Xft1 building in XFree86 4.2.0 today, I think, if we could get Xft1-using ports to not break with Xft2. So, it would be valuable for someone to find the ports that use Xft1 and break when using Xft2 without our renaming patches. To do that, remove all the existing Xft files (X11BASE/include/X11/Xft, lib/libXft*), remove the patches from Xft port and install it, then try building any ports that use Xft. Gnome's pango breaks, as I found out when I tried this, what else? -- Eric Anholt eta@lclark.edu http://people.freebsd.org/~anholt/ anholt@FreeBSD.org To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-ports" in the body of the message