On 05.02.2012 23:06, rfl...@acsalaska.net wrote:
Hi,
I've started working on a port of Zarafa, following
http://wiki.freebsd.org/WantedPorts. I'm not sure if I can finish it,
but I will try my bestest :).
Zarafa has custom patches for libical and libvmime and this is why I
have opted
to create 2 supporting ports mail/zarafa-libvmime and
devel/zarafa-libical.
I was wondering if there are any objections to doing it that way or
that they
be somehow be merged with the original ports (difficult as specific
versions
are available at Zarafa's site to which the patches apply).
For reference, I have attached the shar for the rough version of
zarafa-libvmime,
which currently misses CONFLICTS.
-- Mel
Thanks for starting to work on it! I've added a link from WantedPorts
to that
mail.
Creating duplicate ports for special patches versions of a library is
usually
fine. We already have that in some cases where some ports depend on a
specific
version of a library.
Some projects also ship modified versions of a dependency in their
tree. Good
examples for that are multimedia applications depending on ffmpeg. When
they
do a release their modified ffmpeg sources are included in their source
tarball. If that is also the case for zarafa then don't create new
ports for
that but compile the libraries as part of the zarafa port.
--
Bernhard Froehlich
http://www.bluelife.at/
_______________________________________________
freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
