From owner-freebsd-ports Sun Dec 15 10:33: 5 2002 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 92D5437B401 for ; Sun, 15 Dec 2002 10:33:03 -0800 (PST) Received: from centaur.acm.jhu.edu (centaur.acm.jhu.edu [128.220.223.65]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D04D543EB2 for ; Sun, 15 Dec 2002 10:32:59 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from jflemer@acm.jhu.edu) Received: by centaur.acm.jhu.edu (Postfix, from userid 556) id DC7C913EB2; Sun, 15 Dec 2002 13:32:53 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by centaur.acm.jhu.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id DBE0437F10; Sun, 15 Dec 2002 13:32:53 -0500 (EST) Date: Sun, 15 Dec 2002 13:32:53 -0500 (EST) From: "James E. Flemer" Reply-To: "James E. Flemer" To: AlanE Cc: Subject: Re: libtool 1.3 and 1.4 In-Reply-To: <20021215175004.GC70340@wwweasel.geeksrus.net> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII 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 Sun, 15 Dec 2002, AlanE wrote: > On Sat, Dec 14, 2002 at 07:58:09PM -0500, James E. Flemer wrote: > > --snip-- > > > >I took a few hours today to review the patches offered by > >Jeremy, and to look at the way concurrent versions of > >autoconf (et al) are handled in ports. As a result, I > >threw together a revised set of patches that may be enough > >to get things moving towards a happy coexistence of both > >versions of libtool in the ports tree. Attempts were made > >to keep as many existing ports from breaking, but some > >cases could not be avoided. > > I'll take a look at this. The basic ground rules for doing this are that > nothing may change in the way automake and autoconf are handled in > bsd.port.mk, all non-current versions install info files with version in > name, all non-current versions create a libexec/thingNNN/thing-program > link to the real binary, and person supplying the patches fixes every > port that breaks as a result of the patch. I did not change any auto* bits (intentionally). Libtool13 installs: (among others) info/libtool13.info libexec/libtool13/libtool -> bin/libtool13 libexec/libtool13/libtoolize -> bin/libtoolize13 I guess the question is which version would be "current" and which would be "non-current". I would like to see FreeBSD move to 1.4 as current; it has to happen sometime, and more and more programs want 1.4 to build. As you mentioned when ports are thawed there is going to be breakage all over the place, so it may be a good time to shake things up with libtool. I could probably fix most ports, given that some autobuild system (bento) can tell me what I broke. :-) I don't know a whole lot about bento, but is the libtool patch a good candidate for "experimental port patches"? Perhaps we could get the libtool changes on bento "experimental" before ports is thawed, so that it could be merged soon after. --snip-- > Anyway, today is my 41st birthday and I'm *not* looking at it today. > This week, sure. Happy Birthday! -James To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-ports" in the body of the message