From owner-freebsd-ports Mon Jul 15 14:38: 4 2002 Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.FreeBSD.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5D07737B400 for ; Mon, 15 Jul 2002 14:37:55 -0700 (PDT) Received: from gate.volant.org (gate.volant.org [207.111.218.246]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E463C43E58 for ; Mon, 15 Jul 2002 14:37:54 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from patl+freebsd@volant.org) Received: from 216-55-134-176.dsl.san-diego.abac.net ([216.55.134.176] helo=[192.168.0.13]) by gate.volant.org with asmtp (TLSv1:DES-CBC3-SHA:168) (Exim 3.33 #1) id 17UDXN-000BXL-00; Mon, 15 Jul 2002 14:37:45 -0700 Date: Mon, 15 Jul 2002 14:37:34 -0700 From: Pat Lashley To: Joe Marcus Clarke Cc: ports@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Gnome 1 -vs- 2 Message-ID: <2994122704.1026769054@mccaffrey.phoenix.volant.org> X-Mailer: Mulberry/2.2.1 (Linux/x86 Demo) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="==========414122324==========" Sender: owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.org --==========414122324========== Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline --On Thursday, July 11, 2002 11:51:09 AM -0400 Joe Marcus Clarke=3D20 wrote: > On Thu, 2002-07-11 at 03:41, Pat Lashley wrote: >> When the GNOME2 ports were first added to the ports collection it was >> necessary for anyone using them to be very careful to avoid installing >> anything that would bring in certain of the GONME 1.4 ports which >> conflicted with the 2.0 versions. Is that still true, or have the >> conflicting ports been updated to refuse to install if the other version >> is already installed? In other words, is it safe to install GNOME2 (on a >> clean system), then try to install other ports (like evolution or >> galeon) without explicitly worrying about messing up the GNOME2 >> installation? > > To some extent, you still need to be careful. However, work is under > way to make sure GNOME 1.4.1 apps will not overwrite your GNOME 2.0 > desktop. Have a look at http://www.freebsd.org/gnome under the GNOME > 2.0 FAQ for upgrade instructions. Ok, that helped clear things up a little; especially helpful was the list of 1.4 packages to delete/avoid. From the FreshPorts listings it looks like work has been underway to convert apps that are not GNOME version-specific to build with whichever version is installed. But it seems to me that it would be very helpful to make a simple change to the conflicting ports themselves (e.g., gnomecontrolcenter, gtop, gnomeutils, etc.) to check for the presence of GNOME 2 and issue an error message instead of building. I believe something similar is done in some (non-GNOME) ports where different versions are available but cannot coexist on a single system. -Pat --==========414122324========== Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.0.7 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQE9M0CfncYNbLD8wuMRAg3wAKDaGNvNaII+2NZzVYgbwKqeqqEjjgCeIiEx SetGiiTO9c3r3soBUrub6js= =J5AC -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --==========414122324==========-- To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-ports" in the body of the message