From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Aug 6 07:16:03 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org 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 2F68016A4DD for ; Sun, 6 Aug 2006 07:16:03 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from ssedov@mbsd.msk.ru) Received: from com1.ht-systems.ru (com1.ht-systems.ru [83.97.104.204]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A714743D49 for ; Sun, 6 Aug 2006 07:16:02 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from ssedov@mbsd.msk.ru) Received: from [217.118.83.1] (helo=fonon.realnet) by com1.ht-systems.ru with esmtpa (Exim 4.62) (envelope-from ) id 1G9crd-0006V6-G7 for freebsd-ports@freebsd.org; Sun, 06 Aug 2006 11:16:00 +0400 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by fonon.realnet (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7C04911B6B for ; Sun, 6 Aug 2006 11:15:39 +0400 (MSD) Date: Sun, 6 Aug 2006 11:15:39 +0400 From: Stanislav Sedov To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Message-ID: <20060806111539.0cdc9be3@localhost> In-Reply-To: <20060805225435.T90125@qbhto.arg> References: <20060805225435.T90125@qbhto.arg> Organization: MBSD labs, Inc. X-Operating-System: FreeBSD X-Mailer: carrier-pigeon Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary=Sig_nyI6Vg6ka.9s5WveCwfEzfm; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=PGP-SHA1 X-Spam-Flag: SKIP X-Spam-Yversion: Spamooborona 1.6.0 Subject: Re: LOCALBASE vs. X11BASE (head to head deathmatch!) X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 06 Aug 2006 07:16:03 -0000 --Sig_nyI6Vg6ka.9s5WveCwfEzfm Content-Type: text/plain; charset=KOI8-R Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Sat, 5 Aug 2006 23:23:59 -0700 (PDT) Doug Barton mentioned: > This has been long, so if you're still reading, thanks! :) I hope that it= 's=20 > useful, and that we can continue having a rational discussion about the p= ros=20 > and cons of the various alternatives. I think it would be a good solution. I see no reason to have separate directories for X- and not-X related ports. Furthermore, it will reduce the number of %%X11BASE%%-like substitutions in ports distfiles to work correctly, and number of mtree files we should respect. I've spent a long time fixing ports to respect X11BASE/LOCALBASE/CFLAGS/ PREFIX etc, and it seems, unfortunately, that only a little number of them honor them properly (at least almost all ruby ports don't because of bsd.ruby.mk). It seems to be a very tedious and monotonic work. :-( Thus, reducing number of variables to respect should simplify the task. --=20 Stanislav Sedov MBSD labs, Inc. =F2=CF=D3=D3=C9=D1, =ED=CF=D3=CB=D7=C1 http://mbsd.msk.ru -------------------------------------------------------------------- If the facts don't fit the theory, change the facts. -- A. Einstein -------------------------------------------------------------------- PGP fingerprint: F21E D6CC 5626 9609 6CE2 A385 2BF5 5993 EB26 9581 --Sig_nyI6Vg6ka.9s5WveCwfEzfm Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=signature.asc -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.3 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQFE1ZcbK/VZk+smlYERAlZmAJ0ZGEzkdeiTRLB/KdUj488Fq2OUQQCeIx6t mugVZZoH+smJY6YP4FENkLo= =avmi -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Sig_nyI6Vg6ka.9s5WveCwfEzfm--