Date: Mon, 10 Aug 1998 00:08:18 +0200 From: Andreas Klemm <andreas@klemm.gtn.com> To: Satoshi Asami <asami@cs.berkeley.edu> Cc: andreas@FreeBSD.ORG, ports@FreeBSD.ORG, scrappy@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: qt versions Message-ID: <19980810000818.A1357@klemm.gtn.com> In-Reply-To: <199808091922.MAA01997@silvia.hip.berkeley.edu>; from Satoshi Asami on Sun, Aug 09, 1998 at 12:22:28PM -0700 References: <199808091922.MAA01997@silvia.hip.berkeley.edu>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sun, Aug 09, 1998 at 12:22:28PM -0700, Satoshi Asami wrote:
> Andreas,
>
> What do you want to do with this?
I hoped that somebody, who is more involved in qt *programming*
would make a statement, what to keep and what to wipe out.
But this didn't happen.
So I suggested a sane way of finding out the right solution
a) introduce something like USE_X11 for QT, i.e.:
USE_QT=yes turns on build dependency on QT 1.40
b) Every port, that uses qt should then be modified to have
USE_QT=yes in the Makefile
c) - If every port can be build without trouble, then we can nuke
the old qt libs ! Hurray ! (* This is preferred *)
d) - If some ports can't be compiled or run with qt1.40, we turn
on the old qt lib build dependency in those ports
But then we would have to modify the qt ports in a way, that
they can be installed in parallel.
I hope c) becomes true, this would save some work.
Would you agree on that order ?
--
Andreas Klemm http://www.FreeBSD.ORG/~andreas
What gives you 90% more speed, for example, in kernel compilation ?
http://www.FreeBSD.ORG/~fsmp/SMP/akgraph-a/graph1.html
"NT = Not Today" (Maggie Biggs) ``powered by FreeBSD SMP''
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?19980810000818.A1357>