From owner-freebsd-ports Mon Oct 9 22:58: 9 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Received: from blizzard.sabbo.net (blizzard.sabbo.net [193.193.218.18]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8E4B237B66C; Mon, 9 Oct 2000 22:58:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: from vic.sabbo.net (root@vic.sabbo.net [193.193.218.109]) by blizzard.sabbo.net (8.9.1/8.9.3) with ESMTP id IAA02661; Tue, 10 Oct 2000 08:57:58 +0300 (EEST) Received: from FreeBSD.org (big_brother.vega.com [192.168.1.1]) by vic.sabbo.net (8.11.0/8.9.3) with ESMTP id e9A5vu201775; Tue, 10 Oct 2000 08:57:56 +0300 (EEST) (envelope-from sobomax@FreeBSD.org) Message-ID: <39E2AFE2.EF3DE9D0@FreeBSD.org> Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2000 08:57:55 +0300 From: Maxim Sobolev Organization: Vega International Capital X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en] (WinNT; U) X-Accept-Language: uk,ru,en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Jeremy Lea Cc: ports@FreeBSD.org, asami@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: Problems with bsd.gnome.mk [patch] References: <39E184FE.7FCE1E41@FreeBSD.org> <20001009094132.H30468@shale.csir.co.za> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=koi8-r Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Jeremy Lea wrote: > Hi, > > On Mon, Oct 09, 2000 at 11:42:38AM +0300, Maxim Sobolev wrote: > > I wonder if anyone noticed that bsd.gnome.mk does quite strange things with > > package names when WANT_* defined, so example if you have WANT_GNOME defined in > > your /etc/make.conf and gnome is in fact installed: > > Try defining WITH_GTK in /etc/make.conf and come back to me on this. > The behaviuor is entirely intentional, if you happen to read the > documentation. WANT is for a port's makefile. Hmm, it was not obvious from the bsd.gnome.mk. > > Also I don't like the fact that bsd.gnome.mk adds > > --localstatedir=${PREFIX}/share/gnome and --datadir=${PREFIX}/share/gnome > > configure arguments even for those ports, which contains optional GNOME > > dependencies, so for example port installs its files into ${PREFIX}/share/foo > > for nognome case, but into ${PREFIX}/share/gnome/foo if WANT_GNOME is defined > > (for example sawfish, xmms etc.). IMO this leads to confusion and doesn't > > really necessary. At least this stuff should be made optional, so only ports > > which really can benefit from that would use this feature. As an example of > > possible problems with this behaviour, please considering somebody writing a > > port of sawfish theme - and confusion as to where the theme files should go - > > into share/gnome/safwish, or share/sawfish. Other packages may have similar > > problems. > > This is an unfortunate sideeffect of a policy decision by both Vanilla > and I when we origionally ported Gnome. We decided that all Gnome apps > should put their data in ${X11BASE}/share/gnome. > > I'm not entirely sure that preventing this behaviour is a good thing. > It leads to Gnome apps being ported in two possible ways: Patching to > remove /gnome from after datadir and helpdir, and patching to add /gnome > after pixmapdir. Solving the problem from a port's perspective is also > fairly simple. You define WANT_GNOME, and then test HAVE_GNOME and > define USE_GNOME. You can then use %%DATADIR%% to get the correct PLIST > entries. > > It looks lile I mananged to screw up with sawfish. The Makefile > shouldn't have had PLIST_SUB's for GNOME in it after I was finnished, > and the PLIST should have had %%DATADIR%%'s. Sorry. > > I'll consider something to turn this off, but only in the case where > Gnome is optional. Yes, at least please provide an option to turn this off, otherwise I'll be forced to revert sawfish and some others mine half-GNOME ports to pre-GNOME state. -Maxim To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-ports" in the body of the message