Date: Sun, 31 May 2015 10:30:35 -0700 From: Kevin Oberman <rkoberman@gmail.com> To: Michael Reim <kraileth@elderlinux.org> Cc: "ports@FreeBSD.org" <ports@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: Patch for currently broken x11-wm/ede Message-ID: <CAN6yY1vBQUV4qRu%2BqThf_nyLk=rc7o2gYuGu7s4oT1r-5qtP7Q@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <20150531061153.501a525427c456c28011a416@elderlinux.org> References: <20150531061153.501a525427c456c28011a416@elderlinux.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sat, May 30, 2015 at 9:11 PM, Michael Reim <kraileth@elderlinux.org> wrote: > Hello! > > Coming from a Linux background and just slowly getting used to the FreeBSD > world, I hope that I'm doing things right here. If not - please bear with > me since this is my first attempt to get involved with FreeBSD... > > I've noticed that the port x11-wm/ede is currently marked broken. It > doesn't build anymore since with the latest version of FLTK some internal > symbols that were visible before have been hidden. > > Edelib may have used them in the past but it does not need them anymore. > So any reference to them can be removed from it. This issue has been fixed > upstream with commit 3592 (http://sourceforge.net/p/ede/code/3592/) in > December. Until a new version is released, it would make sense to simply > patch edelib 2.1 to play together with FLTK nicely again. > > Could anybody please add the patch to the port and remove the > broken/ignore tags? > > See attachment for the patch file that I got from the EDE developer. I've > used it to package edelib for Arch Linux and have been using the patched > version in a production environment since last December without any issues. > > Regards, > Michael > -- > > > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" > First, thanks for noting the issue and for providing a patch, but there are limited resources for dealing with ports problems like this and, while sending mail to ports about an issue is fine, there is a significant possibility that this may be lost and not properly addressed. If you could please open a bug report and include the information in this message, it will assure that the report is not lost and, hopefully, will be addressed shortly. Note the "hopefully". As support is voluntary, there are no commitments, but reports that include fixes have a high probability of being addressed fairly quickly. Reports should go to http://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/. If you have not ever submitted a report, you will need to create a bugzilla account. I understand that ti is a few hoops to jump though to just help with fixing broken port, but it's the best way we have found to address the issues. I will also mention that if ports@freebsd.org is listed as the maintainer of a port, that really just means that the port has no maintainer and a group of volunteers will try to make fixes, but it would really help if you could agree to take maintainership of a port in which you have an interest. That makes you a part of the solution and greatly increases the probability of keeping a port running properly. You can see what is required to maintain a port in the Porter's Handbook" at https://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/porters-handbook. If you are willing,, just send a note requesting maintainership. -- Kevin Oberman, Network Engineer, Retired
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CAN6yY1vBQUV4qRu%2BqThf_nyLk=rc7o2gYuGu7s4oT1r-5qtP7Q>