Date: Mon, 27 Aug 2001 18:24:23 -0400 (EDT) From: mi@aldan.algebra.com To: stable@freebsd.org, ports@freebsd.org Subject: support for a.out in ports Message-ID: <200108272224.f7RMOOk22912@misha.privatelabs.com>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Hello! What's the general opinion on listing the minor numbers of the libraries installed by a port in the port's pkg-plist? The bsd.ports.mk strips the minor numbers out automaticly if the PORTOBJFORMAT is not aout, and the following ports currently list libraries in that fashion: XttXF86srv-common beecrypt clanlib cle_base dcdflib expect faces fnlib hesiod iv jade lcms libdjvu++ libdlmalloc libffi libfpx libicq libmalloc libmng libparanoia libslang libsocket++ libtabe linux-lesstif-ns mh omniORB pari pgplot pilot-link pine radiusclient sqlite tcl80 tclExpat tcp_wrapper tix tk80 tvision xforms xview The only arguments against doing it, that I heard, are: a.out is dead everywhere, except for some large corporations, who can afford own admins to maintain/fix their ports I think, this contradicts the FreeBSD's goal of providing quality software for everybody (including large corporations). And if an admin needs to maintain/fix the ports, it is not quality software, IMHO. a.out was retired more than two years ago! I retired my a.out (2.2.8-STABLE) server this May. I can imagine people still having a few co-located far enough to make a release jump troublesome, wishing to be able to build the package on one and copy to another... They are not that difficult to add... Should the minor numbers be tolerated? Should they be welcome? Should they be actively encouraged? Thanks, -mi To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-ports" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200108272224.f7RMOOk22912>