Date: Sat, 06 Nov 1999 04:41:40 +0900 From: "R. Imura" <imura@cs.titech.ac.jp> To: andrews@technologist.com Cc: pfgiffun@bachue.usc.unal.edu.co, ports@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Possible change in the Qt port. Message-ID: <19991106044140H.imura@cs.titech.ac.jp> In-Reply-To: <3.0.6.32.19991103230433.008afc90@mail.psn.net> References: <38209354.5A0E1416@bachue.usc.unal.edu.co> <3.0.6.32.19991103230433.008afc90@mail.psn.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> At 02:56 PM 11/3/99 -0500, you wrote:
> >Anyway, building my first Qt-related port, I ended discussing with
> >Imura-san a change in Qt2. Since many ports seem to like having a QTDIR,
> >I suggested that we should install all Qt under $(PREFIX)/lib/qt/, this
> >way we will be consistent with what the rest of the world expects
> >without disagreeing with FreeBSD's hier(7).
> >
> >I think the Qt1 port should stay where it is now, and that this change
> >should apply from Qt2 (onwards) in order to avoid excessive port
> >breakage and a general mess(tm).
>
> Sounds like a GREAT idea, it would help me submit some Qt2-based ports
> I have been working on for ages (don't ask). :-)
I want to hear many opinions, because it is not my own theme but
all porters'.
In fact, most of apps related Qt expect libs and headers staying at
$QTDIR/{lib,include}. Now its headers is installed to $X11BASE/include/qt2,
so at least one patch must be made for the app's port.
The point of an argument is like which do you place emphasis on,
FreeBSD's hier or few patch and easy step for porting, I think.
---
R. Imura
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-ports" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?19991106044140H.imura>