Date: Wed, 23 Jun 2004 20:00:21 -0700 From: John Merryweather Cooper <johnmary@adelphia.net> To: Joe Marcus Clarke <marcus@marcuscom.com> Cc: FreeBSD GNOME Users <gnome@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: HEADS UP: New gconf key policy Message-ID: <20040624030021.GA56728@borgdemon.losaca.adelphia.net> In-Reply-To: <1088040025.91312.14.camel@shumai.marcuscom.com> References: <1088040025.91312.14.camel@shumai.marcuscom.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, Jun 23, 2004 at 09:20:25PM -0400, Joe Marcus Clarke wrote: > Please take a look at the latest update to archivers/fileroller, and let > me know what you think. This is the new gconf policy I think we need to > adopt if we're to survive the upcoming gconf changes in GNOME 2.8 (it's > similar to the way we handle OMF files now). This will also make gconf > handling much more robust with respect to plists. > > The one downside I see with this is that we will miss Makefile bugs that > prevent proper schema installation. One way around that is to add a > pkg-install script to each port that installs gconf schemas, and do > gconf registration there. This may be more work than it's worth, > though. > > What are people's thoughts on this? Thanks. > > Joe > > -- > PGP Key : http://www.marcuscom.com/pgp.asc Well, there seems to be an increasing amount of post-install tasks in GNOME ports, so I think the idiom of using a pkg-install script for each port is a good one. Turning to a design issue, do you see the changes to gconf handling as making debugging of gconf-related issues easier or harder. I'm having a devil of a time wrestling an update of comms/gfax into working order because of gconf issues. jmc
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20040624030021.GA56728>