From owner-freebsd-eclipse@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Sep 27 08:30:34 2005 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-eclipse@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-eclipse@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6EA9F16A420 for ; Tue, 27 Sep 2005 08:30:34 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from past@ebs.gr) Received: from fly.ebs.gr (fly.ebs.gr [62.103.84.177]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4451443D48 for ; Tue, 27 Sep 2005 08:30:33 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from past@ebs.gr) Received: from ebs.gr (root@hal.ebs.gr [10.1.1.2]) by fly.ebs.gr (8.12.9p1/8.12.9) with ESMTP id j8R8UU9V057263; Tue, 27 Sep 2005 11:30:30 +0300 (EEST) (envelope-from past@ebs.gr) Received: from [10.1.1.158] (pc158.ebs.gr [10.1.1.158]) by ebs.gr (8.13.3/8.12.11) with ESMTP id j8R8Ubf4080261; Tue, 27 Sep 2005 11:30:37 +0300 (EEST) (envelope-from past@ebs.gr) Message-ID: <4339031D.4000004@ebs.gr> Date: Tue, 27 Sep 2005 11:30:21 +0300 From: Panagiotis Astithas Organization: EBS Ltd. User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.6 (X11/20050830) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Mark Hobden References: <1127383357.51404.26.camel@tos.teleplan.no> <4333CC65.90008@ebs.gr> <1127638645.22892.2.camel@localhost> <1127646616.22892.6.camel@localhost> <4337B2F5.3050005@ebs.gr> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: freebsd-eclipse@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Eclipse 3.1_2 window problems X-BeenThere: freebsd-eclipse@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "FreeBSD users of eclipse EDI, tools, rich client apps & ports." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 27 Sep 2005 08:30:34 -0000 Mark Hobden wrote: > On 9/26/05, Panagiotis Astithas wrote: > >>The reason this patch was removed was to avoid treating FreeBSD >>differently than other Unix systems, at the suggestion of an IBM >>engineer. This is was he said: >> >>"I intend to apply the patches to the launcher and SWT, but I have one >>question. I've been worried about the use of "libgtk-x11-2.0.so.0" vs >>"libgtk-x11-2.0.so" on *BSD vs Linux. For shared libraries, the first >>number is the major version number, and an unversioned .so link is >>supposed to point at the current development version (it's what -l >>uses). We can't dlopen the .so on every platform because doesn't always >>exist. Under many Linux distributions, the .so symbolic link only >>exists in the -devel package. I have heard that the library version >>weirdness on FreeBSD is due to a libtool bug, and is fixed by an >>"ltverhack" script at some point, but I have not been able to verify this." >> >>In my tests I concluded that it was unnecessary and I received no >>responses or complaints when I asked for testers. I'm glad that bringing >>it back is a satisfactory solution to this problem, and I don't expect >>any trouble from it, but I wonder whether there is some dlopen flag that >>should be used instead. > > > Hi Panagiotis, > > Firstly I must thank you for all the work you did getting FreeBSD to > compile Eclipse, even with all the plugins I have installed and using > it every day I have never had Eclipse 3.1 lock up on me. :-) > > Sorry I missed your patch that must of been in the month or so before > I subscribed to the Eclipse list. > > Now Eclipse was back to normal for me I thought I should have a look > at the new gnome/gtk versions and it looks like the actual gtk > libraries now seem to end in so.0 so when the gnome 2.12 gets imported > into the ports tree (after the FreeBSD 6 release) it should not cause > any problems to drop the patch again :-) You are quite right about the new versioning in gnome 2.12, I confirmed it with the freebsd-gnome team. It looks like we can be like everyone else after that, if we choose to. Thanks for your persistence with this, Panagiotis