Date: Mon, 03 Dec 2007 17:15:10 -0500 From: "Aryeh M. Friedman" <aryeh.friedman@gmail.com> To: Paul Schmehl <pauls@utdallas.edu> Cc: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: [RFC/P] Port System Re-Engineering Message-ID: <47547FEE.9040405@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <BDFE616B01457E0B71D9FD2F@utd59514.utdallas.edu> References: <BDFE616B01457E0B71D9FD2F@utd59514.utdallas.edu>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 > > ===> Cleaning for xdm-1.1.6_2 > > What was I supposed to find? Did you actually run xdm or just assume because it compiled that it was installed the same way in all cases... hint: the visual appearance varies signficiantly depending on what method you use. XDM is no not unique in this either just off the top of my head I can name the following ports that demostrate different behaviour depending on what order the are installed: gnome-office abiword boost openoffice-2 the entire set of jdk's perl (what is the difference between the 5.8.8 in the base system and the one in ports?!?!?!?) these are just the ones I have found after installing 2 mega metaports and the java stuff... god knows what is lurking out there > > Here's a hint that would help a *ton* of users. Don't try to > install a port until your ports tree is up to date. Completely up > to date - as is, run portsnap or cvs or cvsup *first*, *then* try > to install your port. I use the following "script" (i.e. by hand) installing a new port (might be overkill): cd /usr/ports/.... cvsup /usr/share/examples/cvsup/ports-supfile (I actually use a local cvs repo but this is clearer) portupgrade -a make uninstall distclean install If that doesn't guerntee upto date ports nothing will >> >> I have several possible solutions (contact me privately if you >> want more detail) but am purposely not stating them publically so >> as not to taint the survey any more then it needs to be. >> > This is the part I don't get. If you have suggestions, post them. > Post the code that implements your suggestions. *Then* people can > evaluate whether or not your suggestions add value to the ports > system. > > Why the silly games? As I read them, this seems to be the primary > objection of all the people responding who have @freebsd.org in > their email address. They've heard it all before, but they know > that actions speak much louder than words. If you say "the > implementation of foo is flawed", and then you post code that, IYO, > improves it, people with experience and knowledge can review it > and say, "Hey, nice idea" or "sorry, your code would break ports > and here's why". > > Without the code, all the surveys and gesticulations in this tread > accomplish little except to irritate people. > See my reply to Chuck. - -- Aryeh M. Friedman FloSoft Systems Developer, not business, friendly http://www.flosoft-systems.com -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.4 (FreeBSD) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFHVH/u358R5LPuPvsRAnYZAKCCUg37RDdt0ayWzfnPusA1gwFTDACfYiS2 CVudkH3xInMtHMaPpE7/oow= =GAvV -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?47547FEE.9040405>