Date: Tue, 30 Aug 2005 13:00:20 -0300 From: Mario Sergio Fujikawa Ferreira <lioux@FreeBSD.org> To: "Stephane E. Potvin" <sepotvin@videotron.ca> Cc: freebsd-eclipse@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Eclipse 3.1: no swt-pi-gtk-3138 Message-ID: <20050830160042.50317.qmail@exxodus.fedaykin.here> In-Reply-To: <43144DF3.4020706@videotron.ca> References: <20050829180704.68762.qmail@exxodus.fedaykin.here> <43136B59.7090508@videotron.ca> <431382C3.3060205@ebs.gr> <43144DF3.4020706@videotron.ca>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Hi, Well, I agree that only one instance of swt should be ever lying around. Or, at least, that they not CONFLICT with one another since I need eclipse to build azureus but only swt to run it which means I would have a hell of a dependency problem otherwise. Well, for those wondering about an example. I did a crude hack to azureus to get it going. The port still needs polishing but it is good enough so that you can try any of the mentioned solutions. I, for one, would prefer that the eclipse port would extract the .so files somewhere rather than incarnating yet another port since I also need the swt*jar files which are part of eclipse. We wouldn't gain much from another port (saving run time dependencies I mean), we would require both in the end. Port sample, http://people.FreeBSD.org/~lioux/azureus.tgz Regards, -- Mario S F Ferreira - DF - Brazil - "I guess this is a signature." feature, n: a documented bug | bug, n: an undocumented feature
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20050830160042.50317.qmail>