On Mon, 03 Dec 2007 16:15:10 -0600, Aryeh M. Friedman
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
===> Cleaning for xdm-1.1.6_2
What was I supposed to find?
Did you actually run xdm or just assume because it compiled that it
was installed the same way in all cases... hint: the visual appearance
varies signficiantly depending on what method you use. XDM is no
not unique in this either just off the top of my head I can name the
following ports that demostrate different behaviour depending on what
order the are installed:
gnome-office
abiword
boost
openoffice-2
the entire set of jdk's
perl (what is the difference between the 5.8.8 in the base system and
the one in ports?!?!?!?)
these are just the ones I have found after installing 2 mega metaports
and the java stuff... god knows what is lurking out there
1) Perl hasn't been in base system since FreeBSD 5.x.
2) There is no 'make uninstall' target in ports tree that I recall.
3) Never and never edit anything inside /usr/share/examples/*
4) If xdm behaves different when you install one of ports that xdm's
configure happened to detect it. You should check in xdm to see what its
configure has pick up dependency by auto-check then report to the
maintainer to fix xdm dependency. That kind of bug doesn't make ports tree
need to be rewrite.
Cheers,
Mezz
Here's a hint that would help a *ton* of users. Don't try to
install a port until your ports tree is up to date. Completely up
to date - as is, run portsnap or cvs or cvsup *first*, *then* try
to install your port.
I use the following "script" (i.e. by hand) installing a new port
(might be overkill):
cd /usr/ports/....
cvsup /usr/share/examples/cvsup/ports-supfile (I actually use a local
cvs repo but this is clearer)
portupgrade -a
make uninstall distclean install
If that doesn't guerntee upto date ports nothing will
I have several possible solutions (contact me privately if you
want more detail) but am purposely not stating them publically so
as not to taint the survey any more then it needs to be.
This is the part I don't get. If you have suggestions, post them.
Post the code that implements your suggestions. *Then* people can
evaluate whether or not your suggestions add value to the ports
system.
Why the silly games? As I read them, this seems to be the primary
objection of all the people responding who have @freebsd.org in
their email address. They've heard it all before, but they know
that actions speak much louder than words. If you say "the
implementation of foo is flawed", and then you post code that, IYO,
improves it, people with experience and knowledge can review it
and say, "Hey, nice idea" or "sorry, your code would break ports
and here's why".
Without the code, all the surveys and gesticulations in this tread
accomplish little except to irritate people.
See my reply to Chuck.
- --
Aryeh M. Friedman
FloSoft Systems
Developer, not business, friendly
http://www.flosoft-systems.com
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.4 (FreeBSD)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iD8DBQFHVH/u358R5LPuPvsRAnYZAKCCUg37RDdt0ayWzfnPusA1gwFTDACfYiS2
CVudkH3xInMtHMaPpE7/oow=
=GAvV
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
FreeBSD GNOME Team - FreeBSD Multimedia Hat (ports, not src)
http://www.FreeBSD.org/gnome/ - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://wiki.freebsd.org/multimedia - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
_______________________________________________
freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
