From owner-cvs-all Mon Mar 18 17:39:44 2002 Delivered-To: cvs-all@freebsd.org Received: from mail.rpi.edu (mail.rpi.edu [128.113.22.40]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0E85437B41C; Mon, 18 Mar 2002 17:39:28 -0800 (PST) Received: from [128.113.24.47] (gilead.acs.rpi.edu [128.113.24.47]) by mail.rpi.edu (8.12.1/8.12.1) with ESMTP id g2J1d4C8063966; Mon, 18 Mar 2002 20:39:05 -0500 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: drosih@mail.rpi.edu Message-Id: 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> <20020319010652.GA22998@squall.waterspout.com> Date: Mon, 18 Mar 2002 20:39:03 -0500 To: Will Andrews From: Garance A Drosihn Subject: Re: cvs commit: ports/x11/XFree86-4 Makefile Cc: Kris Kennaway , Josef Karthauser , "Daniel C. Sobral" , cvs-committers@FreeBSD.org, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.3 (www dot roaringpenguin dot com slash mimedefang) Sender: owner-cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG 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