Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Mon, 18 Mar 2002 20:39:03 -0500
From:      Garance A Drosihn <drosih@rpi.edu>
To:        Will Andrews <will@csociety.org>
Cc:        Kris Kennaway <kris@obsecurity.org>, Josef Karthauser <joe@tao.org.uk>, "Daniel C. Sobral" <dcs@newsguy.com>, cvs-committers@FreeBSD.org, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org
Subject:   Re: cvs commit: ports/x11/XFree86-4 Makefile
Message-ID:  <p0510150cb8bc43b2b94e@[128.113.24.47]>
In-Reply-To: <20020319010652.GA22998@squall.waterspout.com>
References:  <200203181643.g2IGhnW66937@freefall.freebsd.org> <3C96742F.12AFE590@newsguy.com> <20020318231354.GA17607@genius.tao.org.uk> <20020318154352.C71020@xor.obsecurity.org> <p05101509b8bc36328f68@[128.113.24.47]> <20020319010652.GA22998@squall.waterspout.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
At 8:06 PM -0500 3/18/02, Will Andrews wrote:
>On Mon, Mar 18, 2002 at 07:37:42PM -0500, Garance A Drosihn wrote:
>>  ...and Garance maintains that everyone is misunderstanding
>>  the basic problem here.  I do not wish to annoy everyone
>
>Your message here does not indicate that you understand it
>either.  Kris is absolutely right, people need to use -u.
>This applies regardless of how you had X installed before.

Let me also note that I do understand the issue you are
talking about.  My position is that there is a larger
issue, an issue that is totally unrelated to the libraries
that you are discussing.  I believe there is an issue which
is specifically related to the "megaport" going into several
"subports" and a meta-port.  The package-handling programs
can not handle that situation very well.  I do understand
the point that you and Kris are talking about.

Let me try it this way.  Why is -u an issue in this case?
Why isn't this an issue which has come up in many other
ports, as people have been port-upgraded one thing after
another for the last several months?  Is this the first
time we have ever upgraded something with a library in it?

I really do feel bad that I may seem to be coming across like
someone who is arguing just to argue, but I am pretty sure
that people are just fixing a symptom of the bigger issue.
Now it may be that fixing the symptom will be good enough,
but I think the bigger issue is also interesting to think
about.  The painful part about debating it over this port
is that this port is so time-consuming to do anything with,
so it isn't much fun to do many separate builds of it.

-- 
Garance Alistair Drosehn            =   gad@eclipse.acs.rpi.edu
Senior Systems Programmer           or  gad@freebsd.org
Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute    or  drosih@rpi.edu

To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe cvs-all" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?p0510150cb8bc43b2b94e>