Date: Thu, 8 Jul 1999 16:53:24 -0700 (PDT) From: Doug <Doug@gorean.org> To: "David O'Brien" <obrien@FreeBSD.ORG> Cc: Marcel Moolenaar <marcel@scc.nl>, Sheldon Hearn <sheldonh@uunet.co.za>, cvs-committers@FreeBSD.ORG, cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: cvs commit: ports/emulators/linux-base-5.2 - Imported sources Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.4.05.9907081642310.29777-100000@dt054n86.san.rr.com> In-Reply-To: <19990708114649.A67400@dragon.nuxi.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, 8 Jul 1999, David O'Brien wrote:
> At at minimum the ports should be renamed ``linux-base-RH52'' and
> ``linux-base-RH60''. We don't have "."'s in our ports directories, and I
> personally don't want to start now. And put "RH" in the name so we know
> it is RH that these version numbers apply to.
I think you raise a good point in your paragraph below, and I
would further suggest that it would be more clear to name the ports
linux-user-libc and linux-user-glibc, or something similar. Marcel could
include appropriate details (based on RH, versions of the libs, etc.) in
the pkg/* files. If further branching of the ports based on specific
versions of the two types of libraries is needed, we can take it from
there. BTW, the -user- distinction is meaningful because some (most?)
linux distributions split versions of the same libraries into runtime
(user) and compiletime (devel) binaries.
> Why do we need two ports?? I want Linux emulation, I don't want to have
> to know if I need RH52 compatibility (which is really a libc5 issue) or
> RH60 (which is really a glibc2 issue).
Then you're asking for more than linux users get. (not that that
would be a bad thing.) I think that Marcel has hit on an interesting area,
namely the more "linux compatible" our linux emulation becomes, the more
goofy linux'isms we will need to work with. This is just one of them.
> I don't which I need for Linux
> Netscape or Linux Acroread and I *don't* want to know. I want to install
> a set of libs,etc. that will work for what ever Linux thing thrown at me.
Heh.... that'd sure be nice, I'm just not sure it's possible.
In short, I really hope that people will lighten up on Marcel a
little bit (ok, a lot). If he's willing to devote a big chunk of time to
this, and his code ends up improving our emulation ability, I say give him
the rope and see if he hangs himself with it before we start slapping his
wrists. The last thing that the project needs right now is to scare off
people who are willing to put the time into creative new solutions to old
problems. Of course I say that with all due respect to the people who've
already put a lot of time into the thing. We're in very decent shape right
now for linux emulation, but if Marcel can produce the goods, why not take
some more steps forward?
Doug
--
On account of being a democracy and run by the people, we are the only
nation in the world that has to keep a government four years, no matter
what it does.
-- Will Rogers
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?Pine.BSF.4.05.9907081642310.29777-100000>