From owner-freebsd-current Thu Jan 8 18:56:27 1998 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) id SAA00574 for current-outgoing; Thu, 8 Jan 1998 18:56:27 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-current) Received: from silvia.HIP.Berkeley.EDU (ala-ca34-30.ix.netcom.com [207.93.143.158]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA00544; Thu, 8 Jan 1998 18:56:18 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from asami@vader.cs.berkeley.edu) Received: (from asami@localhost) by silvia.HIP.Berkeley.EDU (8.8.8/8.6.9) id QAA28454; Thu, 8 Jan 1998 16:57:19 -0800 (PST) Date: Thu, 8 Jan 1998 16:57:19 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <199801090057.QAA28454@silvia.HIP.Berkeley.EDU> To: drow@drow.net CC: rone@bofh.noc.best.net, current@FreeBSD.ORG, ports@FreeBSD.ORG In-reply-to: (message from Dan Jacobowitz on Thu, 8 Jan 1998 19:18:40 -0500 (EST)) Subject: Re: tcl, ports From: asami@cs.berkeley.edu (Satoshi Asami) Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk * Except, for instance, if you have compiled anything whose name contains * tcl in /usr/src. It seems to me that using that many wildcards in an rm * is just asking for angry admins. That's why it's asking you to do it instead of doing it by itself. If you are experienced enough to put something non-standard in /usr/src, you are expected to know what you're doing. Anyway, I am eagerly awaiting someone who's been running -current to submit an updated checklist and diagnoses. (Not to pick on you Dan, but why is it that the fix/complaint ratio is so low these days on the FreeBSD lists?) To start out, here's what I think is appropriate: check for: /usr/include/tcl.h /usr/lib/libtcl??.so.*.* tell users to: delete the above two if they don't want system tcl, rm -rf /usr/{include,libdata}/tcl, /usr/{lib,bin}/*tcl*, /usr/share/man/*n/* run ldconfig -R (I believe system tcl installs libtcl.so.*.* now.) Satoshi