Date: Fri, 21 Apr 2017 00:16:31 +0200 From: Baptiste Daroussin <bapt@FreeBSD.org> To: Mathieu Arnold <mat@FreeBSD.org> Cc: Koop Mast <kwm@FreeBSD.org>, ports@FreeBSD.org, arch@FreeBSD.org, portmgr@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: manpath change for ports ? Message-ID: <20170420221631.yxukhuwo4tn7blte@ivaldir.net> In-Reply-To: <dee320db-98d5-177c-839f-68225e56a1ae@FreeBSD.org> References: <20170306235610.cmpxk27jhoafel6l@ivaldir.net> <1492723094.55896.22.camel@FreeBSD.org> <20170420212153.cawvn4xsxuwuebfu@ivaldir.net> <dee320db-98d5-177c-839f-68225e56a1ae@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--sl34vmva77hxhbwl Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Fri, Apr 21, 2017 at 12:13:52AM +0200, Mathieu Arnold wrote: > Le 20/04/2017 =E0 23:21, Baptiste Daroussin a =E9crit : > > On Thu, Apr 20, 2017 at 11:18:14PM +0200, Koop Mast wrote: > >> On Tue, 2017-03-07 at 00:56 +0100, Baptiste Daroussin wrote: > >>> Hi all, > >>> > >>> I would like to propose a change in the localbase hier for ports > >>> > >>> I think we should add /usr/local/share/man in the manpath along with > >>> at first > >>> and maybe instead of in long term. > >>> > >>> The reason is: > >>> - /usr/local/share/man seems more consistent to me with base which > >>> have: > >>> /usr/share/man > >>> - It will remove lots of patches from the ports tree where were we > >>> need to patch > >>> upstream build system to install in a non usual path. > >>> > >>> My proposal is to add to the manpath /usr/local/share/man in default > >>> man(1) > >>> command in FreeBSD 12 (MFCed to 11-STABLE) > >>> > >>> and either provide an errata for 11.0/10.3 or a > >>> /usr/local/etc/man.d/something.conf via a port or something like that > >>> for those > >>> two, what do you think? > >>> > >>> For the same reason I would like to allow porters to stop patching > >>> (with pathfix > >>> or anything else) the path for pkgconfig files and allow > >>> /usr/local/lib/pkgconfig along with the current > >>> /usr/local/libdata/pkgconfig:/usr/libdata/pkgconfig > >>> > >>> Which will also remove tons of hacks from the ports tree. > >>> > >>> What do you think? > >>> > >>> Best regards, > >>> Bapt > >> Hello, > >> > >> I recently committed the USES for the meson build system to ports. This > >> USES configures the meson build system with some default variables > >> which includes the location of the man pages. This setting is just a > >> flag to the meson command so it easy to change. > >> > >> Meson also handles the generation and installation of pkg-config files > >> that a port wants. The problem is that this is handled by the script > >> itself and there is no way to configure it, so we need to hack the > >> meson port to change it from lib/pkg-config to libdata/pkg-config like > >> we currently are using. (1) Or add a hack to meson.mk to move the pkg- > >> config to the right location (evil++ imho). > >> > >> My point I want to make is that currently there is only 1 port build > >> via the meson system (graphics/graphene). Should we change man/pkg- > >> config file locations now, it very easy. If we want to change them > >> later we will need to mass bump every meson build port. It is important > >> to note that GStreamer and GNOME are moving over to using meson instead > >> of autotools and that Wayland, Xorg en Mesa are exploring want is > >> needed to make the switch. So I think it important that the decision > >> what to do is done now and that we stick with it. > >> > >> Reading the rest of the thread it seems nobody is really against the > >> proposed change of man and pkg-config path's. So how does one submit a > >> policy change like this? I'm also not sure I'm the right person to push > >> this, I just got back from a break and I don't want to really deal with > >> something super high profile right away. > >> > >> -Koop > >> > >> (1) I would like to see lib/pkg-config back in the search path of > >> pkgconf since that means I don't have to do a crash course python > >> programming. > > Would be nice is portmgr can step on this, let's reduce this discussion= for now > > on pkgconf. >=20 >=20 > I am waiting on an exp-run to fix this once and for all. >=20 > https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D218067 >=20 > When that is committed, anything can be added to the path pkgconfig > searches, ports will always install it in the right place. >=20 Sorry but why? why not moving libdata/pkgconfig to lib/pkgconfig? what is t= he rationale? Bapt --sl34vmva77hxhbwl Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQIzBAABCAAdFiEEgOTj3suS2urGXVU3Y4mL3PG3PloFAlj5MzkACgkQY4mL3PG3 PlphjRAA0m6+ToQaXkg+oY9oGAqr+E0XPmvE4ECiy4l0hKblbWHzE3xghFRuiSKa BfdO8DVJ28Eih6jBCJfktJTbwGZLU20R9EJWdM2rLNZICsHJ8cs4DhcP06GXNI4X QThKqMSvBQhlmH1gdgtm47i7sBQbBEU1k8FPsRBl1OgKsAXqXak9boTHbnhi7PGj u0Ves2vrrgtU4XgjQXxsot5IEZzoFzJROshVXGHmUNBD6rSzcps1pTLCtKK84BcW 4GztFkWvawxCVuixdmh/B95+lOBoPd57+QxcO8hFeGbmURCh8+GM5JGD7MkxUCs2 3qz5tcnLTBHlHABqaRKba/xWbj/KFZVPR8EM6+qlVX/M2GYgla5g4/GYUkuT05kw d/ofx8GTRnYWD9Zwwt3BO3JP5ngX7KalmEWwsFu5e/bgqMgimJdi05pRXZnjVSmm XAS7urTyF3J+Aeh/vO2Vd2EfRg2uDC+El7Ey1B7xiHFRQPFM68ahjtxu01hcn5lF X5qQ662nMANQQJ+u/nrEFLTOg7N/BMC46cKTjYOcxwRnueSa+VZV5I+EiKlLN6k0 jrtzb9w8uNgnICO8b1R1YW3QvQwqG/+xuz6qtSMkyQh1Nd1bPT1AUSXGUXC6TLWN 0G3IAIDmezeAVPD6I63hEwWnQAQNVXf7CRB2L+qy3GEkKVDV0jc= =WPBZ -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --sl34vmva77hxhbwl--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20170420221631.yxukhuwo4tn7blte>