From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Sep 19 21:34:29 2010 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9E6761065673 for ; Sun, 19 Sep 2010 21:34:29 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from jdc@koitsu.dyndns.org) Received: from qmta03.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net (qmta03.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net [76.96.30.32]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 83EB78FC15 for ; Sun, 19 Sep 2010 21:34:29 +0000 (UTC) Received: from omta01.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net ([76.96.30.11]) by qmta03.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net with comcast id 8kur1f0020EPchoA3laUrl; Sun, 19 Sep 2010 21:34:28 +0000 Received: from koitsu.dyndns.org ([98.248.41.155]) by omta01.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net with comcast id 8laT1f00J3LrwQ28MlaTiQ; Sun, 19 Sep 2010 21:34:28 +0000 Received: by icarus.home.lan (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 6DDE59B427; Sun, 19 Sep 2010 14:34:27 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sun, 19 Sep 2010 14:34:27 -0700 From: Jeremy Chadwick To: Jos Chrispijn Message-ID: <20100919213427.GA14546@icarus.home.lan> References: <4C963526.6020201@webrz.net> <20100919170117.GA26484@owl.midgard.homeip.net> <4C967393.60004@webrz.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4C967393.60004@webrz.net> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) Cc: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Double versions installed 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, 19 Sep 2010 21:34:29 -0000 On Sun, Sep 19, 2010 at 10:33:23PM +0200, Jos Chrispijn wrote: > On 19-9-2010 19:01, Erik Trulsson wrote: > >That is perfectly normal. Some programs require one specific version > >of autoconf, while others require another version, so one easily ends > >up with more than one version installed. They can live side-by-side so > >having more than one version installed is not a problem. > I see. But out of a programmers point of view, I would never stick > to my old versions but update to newer ones because I need to catch > up with other new program versions that need mine. In this way a > programmer is forced to keep maintaining his older version allthough > he moves forward with the rest of the crowd. You've never worked with GNU autotools, have you? :-) It's fairly well-established that they break in different ways every time there's a new release, or certain macros are deprecated/changed in an incompatible way. This is not hearsay, this is fact. Therefore, if a piece of third-party software requires autoconf or automake to build its configure scripts or Makefiles, it's up to the port maintainer of said third-party software to make sure that the correct autoconf/automake version is selected. Sometimes it's even worse than that: the configure scripts that come with the third-party software may have been built on the developers' machine using a buggy version of autoconf. In this case, sometimes the only solution is for the port to include (as a dependency) a version of autoconf that builds a working/proper configure script. I realise this sounds crazy ("how can someone release software that's broken out of the box like that?"), but it's absolutely true. Simply put: the "latest and greatest" concept does not apply to the autotools, and what you see in the FreeBSD ports system is validation/proof of that. -- | Jeremy Chadwick jdc@parodius.com | | Parodius Networking http://www.parodius.com/ | | UNIX Systems Administrator Mountain View, CA, USA | | Making life hard for others since 1977. PGP: 4BD6C0CB |