From owner-freebsd-ports Mon Nov 8 1: 6:22 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Received: from m0.cs.berkeley.edu (m0.CS.Berkeley.EDU [128.32.45.176]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5756115177; Mon, 8 Nov 1999 01:06:20 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from asami@stampede.cs.berkeley.edu) Received: from silvia.hip.berkeley.edu (sji-ca7-01.ix.netcom.com [209.109.235.1]) by m0.cs.berkeley.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id BAA50167; Mon, 8 Nov 1999 01:06:11 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from asami@stampede.cs.berkeley.edu) Received: (from asami@localhost) by silvia.hip.berkeley.edu (8.9.3/8.6.9) id BAA82842; Mon, 8 Nov 1999 01:06:06 -0800 (PST) To: Will Andrews Cc: ports@FreeBSD.ORG, pfgiffun@bachue.usc.unal.edu.co, "R. Imura" , se@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Possible change in the Qt port. References: From: asami@FreeBSD.ORG (Satoshi - Ports Wraith - Asami) Date: 08 Nov 1999 01:06:04 -0800 In-Reply-To: Will Andrews's message of "Sun, 07 Nov 1999 04:34:13 -0500 (EST)" Message-ID: Lines: 53 X-Mailer: Gnus v5.7/Emacs 20.4 Sender: owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org * From: Will Andrews * On 07-Nov-99 Satoshi - Ports Wraith - Asami wrote: * > ${PREFIX}/include/qt2/ -> ${PREFIX}/lib/qt/include/qt2/ * * Qt2 goes in its own league. You can't mix and match. (remember, Qt2 requires * gcc 2.95.*, whereas Qt 1.4x does not.) Ok, but what does that have to do with moving the include files from one segregated subdirectory to another? * > (the filenames are hypothetical, I don't know if qt has any * > executables -- just take these as examples of the idea) * * moc is _the_ Qt binary. It's normally in ${X11BASE}/bin/. Ok, thanks. * > If so, I'm against this change. There are reasons and history behind * > us asking ports to conform to our hier; this runs completely counter * > to it. * * hier(7) does seem to disagree with this, as neither includes nor binaries are * "X11 libraries". What the jell are you talking about? You mean this one? > man 7 hier : X11R6/ X11R6 distribution executables, libraries, etc (op- tional). : * I think the BIGGEST problem with Qt / KDE is the way KDE has its stuff * installed into ${LOCALBASE} instead of ${X11BASE}, like Qt does. Many ports * depend on both Qt and KDE libraries/includes, making it extremely difficult for * a port to know where to install things. Hmm. * I propose that KDE be moved to ${X11BASE}, all of it. Why it was put into * ${LOCALBASE} in the first place is beyond me. KDE is a pretty X-centric package, I personally have no problem with moving them to ${X11BASE}. I believe the reason why it was put into ${LOCALBASE} was because the default Makefiles that come with KDE want to install into ${LOCALBASE}/kde which Stefan (KDE maintainer) changed to ${LOCALBASE}. Is that the only reason why it's in ${LOCALBASE} and not ${X11BASE}, Stefan? -PW To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-ports" in the body of the message