From owner-freebsd-emulation@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Feb 10 09:19:35 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-emulation@FreeBSD.org Delivered-To: freebsd-emulation@FreeBSD.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AADFC16A422; Fri, 10 Feb 2006 09:19:35 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from Alexander@Leidinger.net) Received: from www.ebusiness-leidinger.de (jojo.ms-net.de [84.16.236.246]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 255EE43D45; Fri, 10 Feb 2006 09:19:34 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from Alexander@Leidinger.net) Received: from Andro-Beta.Leidinger.net (p54A5DADF.dip.t-dialin.net [84.165.218.223]) (authenticated bits=0) by www.ebusiness-leidinger.de (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id k1A98FRB093931; Fri, 10 Feb 2006 10:08:16 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from Alexander@Leidinger.net) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by Andro-Beta.Leidinger.net (8.13.3/8.13.3) with ESMTP id k1A9JV08072849; Fri, 10 Feb 2006 10:19:31 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from Alexander@Leidinger.net) Received: from pslux.cec.eu.int (pslux.cec.eu.int [158.169.9.14]) by webmail.leidinger.net (Horde MIME library) with HTTP; Fri, 10 Feb 2006 10:19:31 +0100 Message-ID: <20060210101931.k017bqbpus8gosws@netchild.homeip.net> X-Priority: 3 (Normal) Date: Fri, 10 Feb 2006 10:19:31 +0100 From: Alexander Leidinger To: Jean-Yves Lefort References: <200602081940.k18Je7uC012039@freefall.freebsd.org> <20060209202602.1449abba.jylefort@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <20060209202602.1449abba.jylefort@FreeBSD.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format="flowed" Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit User-Agent: Internet Messaging Program (IMP) H3 (4.0.3) / FreeBSD-4.11 X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new Cc: freebsd-emulation@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: ports/91911: [PATCH]: x11-toolkits/linux-gtk2: distfile unfetchable X-BeenThere: freebsd-emulation@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Development of Emulators of other operating systems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 10 Feb 2006 09:19:35 -0000 Jean-Yves Lefort wrote: >> Let me guess: you are trying to install acroread7 while linux-gtk2 >> isn't installed. >> >> You get this error message because of a bug in bsd.port.mk (or in the >> acroread7 port, depending on your point of view...). >> >> The linux-gtk2 port is just fine. Install it by hand instead of a >> dependency of the acroread port and it should work just fine. > > Alexander, as you've been told many times now the acroread7 port is > fine (with regard to that issue at least); the bug is in bpm or in the > linux ports which override ARCH. I suggest to commit Frank Laszlo's > patches, since modifying bpm is a tedious process. I don't doupt that bpm has a problem in this case. And I agree that we may be able to come up with a better solution for the linux ports. But I don't agree that the acroread port is fine. It doesn't fit into the way most of the linux ports work ATM, so it doesn't play well with the rest, so it's broken in this regard. So the short-time fix for the acroread port would be to add the same ARCH shuffling as the other ports have (see below). Yes, the use of a different variable name in the linux ports is a better fix for this. No, I don't want to commit Frank's patches. Not because they are blatantly wrong, but because I don't agree with the name of the variable used. SUB_ARCH is very generic, while your use of LINUX_RPM_ARCH in bsd.linux-rpm.mk looks much better. If someone comes up with a patch which changes all linux ports which do the ARCH-shuffling thing to use LINUX_RPM_ARCH instead, I try to get time and commit this (after coordinating with portmgr because of the "no-sweeping-changes flag"). I also don't mind if someone else commits such patches (after coordinating with portmgr). But I don't think we need to rush this out before the ports freeze. It would be enough to commit the ARCH-shuffling part to the acroread port and let the RELEASEs ship with it. After the ports freeze it could then be fixed properly without time pressure. It's not only about doing it right, it's also about time constraints and about not breaking things for our userbase (or new users of the upcoming release). And it's not only about time constraints of those committers, which are willing to handle it (and have time to fix bugs in case some slip into the commit), but also about project related time constraints (release related freezes, maybe portmgr want's to do a experimental run of those patches on the cluster, ...). The update to the current linux_base version was done shortly before a release, and kris and I spend the days around christmas to get it into a good shape. The update was necessary because of security issues, and I think my time was spend well at that time, since we where able to ship with a usable linuxolator (I don't remember any major bugs, and I changed a lot of ports). The change both of you propose has an impact on a lot of ports (because of the use of the linux-gtk Makefile in a lot of other ports), and I don't think we absolutely need to do such a sweeping change before the release since there not such a heavy wight reason like we had with the linux_base update. There's an easy and small work-around for the acroread port available and it doesn't hurt to commit it, so there's no need to force the inclusion of the "architecturally(sp?) right fix". Bye, Alexander. -- http://www.Leidinger.net Alexander @ Leidinger.net: PGP ID = B0063FE7 http://www.FreeBSD.org netchild @ FreeBSD.org : PGP ID = 72077137 Better hope the life-inspector doesn't come around while you have your life in such a mess.