From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Feb 12 19:07:26 2010 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 74959106568B for ; Fri, 12 Feb 2010 19:07:26 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from corky1951@comcast.net) Received: from qmta08.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net (qmta08.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net [76.96.30.80]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5A00D8FC15 for ; Fri, 12 Feb 2010 19:07:26 +0000 (UTC) Received: from omta09.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net ([76.96.30.20]) by qmta08.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net with comcast id h1881d0040S2fkCA877SRo; Fri, 12 Feb 2010 19:07:26 +0000 Received: from comcast.net ([98.203.142.76]) by omta09.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net with comcast id h77Q1d00G1f6R9u8V77RCg; Fri, 12 Feb 2010 19:07:26 +0000 Received: by comcast.net (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Fri, 12 Feb 2010 11:07:23 -0800 Date: Fri, 12 Feb 2010 11:07:23 -0800 From: Charlie Kester To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Message-ID: <20100212190723.GB17839@comcast.net> Mail-Followup-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org References: <6790187d1002112022q1a0dcd1dxbf9accdba50167c9@mail.gmail.com> <4B7516AA.3010600@black-earth.co.uk> <20100212062506.247d25d5@scorpio.seibercom.net> <4B754270.9030001@black-earth.co.uk> <1265977673.5468.5.camel@lenzinote> <4B759D2F.5090608@bsdforen.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4B759D2F.5090608@bsdforen.de> X-Mailer: Mutt 1.5.20 X-Composer: VIM 7.2 User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) Subject: Re: FreeBSD Ports Problem - Please help X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 12 Feb 2010 19:07:26 -0000 On Fri 12 Feb 2010 at 10:25:51 PST Dominic Fandrey wrote: >Hmm, I just tested it, because my port sysutils contains pkg_libchk, >which has a very similar function. [...] >It doesn't have libchk's ability to list unused libraries, though. Libchk's manpage contains a warning about this. You shouldn't leap to the conclusion that what it calls "unreferenced libraries" are "unused". That uncertainty does tend to reduce the usefulness of the list, so your package doesn't suffer in the comparison as much as you might think. :)