From owner-freebsd-ports Sat Feb 20 3:42:53 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Received: from mail.palmerharvey.co.uk (mail.palmerharvey.co.uk [62.172.109.58]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 669C5112A1 for ; Sat, 20 Feb 1999 03:42:44 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from Dom.Mitchell@palmerharvey.co.uk) Received: from ho-nt-01.pandhm.co.uk (unverified) by mail.palmerharvey.co.uk (Content Technologies SMTPRS 2.0.15) with ESMTP id ; Sat, 20 Feb 1999 11:42:36 +0000 Received: from voodoo.pandhm.co.uk ([10.100.35.12]) by ho-nt-01.pandhm.co.uk with SMTP (Microsoft Exchange Internet Mail Service Version 5.5.2448.0) id F1KNMKZ7; Sat, 20 Feb 1999 11:37:08 -0000 Received: from dom by voodoo.pandhm.co.uk with local (Exim 2.10 #1) id 10EAq7-0001GO-00; Sat, 20 Feb 1999 11:44:55 +0000 To: Jeremy Lea Cc: FreeBSD-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: ports/10170: gtop build broken X-Mailer: nmh v0.26 X-Colour: Green Organization: Palmer & Harvey McLane In-Reply-To: Jeremy Lea's message of "Sat, 20 Feb 1999 13:12:00 +0200" <19990220131159.A9063@shale.csir.co.za> Date: Sat, 20 Feb 1999 11:44:55 +0000 From: Dom Mitchell Message-Id: Sender: owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org On 20 February 1999, Jeremy Lea proclaimed: > Hi to all porters, > > On Sat, Feb 20, 1999 at 10:23:57AM +0000, Dom Mitchell wrote: > > >Synopsis: gtop build broken > > This is not a flame... > > The breakage is in libgtop, which needs to include "sys/types.h" in the > headers... The gnome meta port is also not up to date, it doesn't > install half of the ports. > > Is there any way of marking ports with a variable which says "Please don't > send-pr on this port, it is work in progress"? Vanilla has been > updating to GNOME 0.99.8, and he is only about half way through. With > the ports. I've also done some work on the GNOME ports, and they break > things all over the place... so much for freature freeze. The GNOME > ports need to be marked as 'flaky' until they hit 1.0, at which point > they should be expected to work as a group. It'll just cost extra > version number bumping to mark them as broken when the base library > upgrading starts. Or the upgrading must be held back and done as one > mega commit, which places more work on the maintainers, and will delay > the upgrading. I apologise; I've had quite a few problems getting GNOME to work. This seemed to be the most major one yet. I fully agree that it is not yet ready for prime time in it's present state. :-( I wish all developments were as organised and stable as FreeBSD... > Someone should close this PR. Please do. -- Dom Mitchell -- Palmer & Harvey McLane -- Unix Systems Administrator Free your mind -- http://www.opensource.org/ -- ********************************************************************** This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify the system manager. This footnote also confirms that this email message has been swept by MIMEsweeper for the presence of computer viruses. ********************************************************************** To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-ports" in the body of the message