Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Wed, 26 Aug 1998 13:11:15 +0200
From:      Martin Cracauer <cracauer@cons.org>
To:        Satoshi Asami <asami@FreeBSD.ORG>, cracauer@cons.org
Cc:        freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG, vanilla@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject:   Re: Some -devel ports break autoconf (gtk11 spotted)
Message-ID:  <19980826131115.C18242@cons.org>
In-Reply-To: <199808201002.DAA04653@silvia.hip.berkeley.edu>; from Satoshi Asami on Thu, Aug 20, 1998 at 03:02:44AM -0700
References:  <19980819142241.A29002@cons.org> <199808201002.DAA04653@silvia.hip.berkeley.edu>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
What became out of this?

I am curious what people think of a $(PREFIX-DEVEL) directory tree, at
least for application-building parts (libraries, includefiles), so
that building applications against -current libaries becomes less of a
nightmare. -developemnt applications can be installed to the main
$(PREFIX) again, at least their binaries, so that people don't have to
change their $PATH.

>  * Date: Wed, 19 Aug 1998 14:22:41 +0200
>  * From: Martin Cracauer <cracauer@cons.org>
>  * 
>  * 
>  * When having gtk and gtk11 installed, you have gtk.m4 and gtk11.m4 in
>  * /usr/local/share/aclocal. 
>  * 
>  * This breaks autoconf (more specially, aclocal), since both files
>  * define variables of the same name.
>  * 
>  * The proper fix in the line of the usual stable/current port way would
>  * be to change the names of all variables in gtk11.m4 from gtk to
>  * gtk11. This would put a lot of work on the shoulders for everyone
>  * trying to compile something against gtk11.
>  * 
>  * So I think it would be more wise to create a
>  * $(PREFIX)/share/aclocal.current/ directory, where ports with possibly
>  * conflicting aclocal parts could place them and maintainers of
>  * depending ports could easily address them.
>  * 
>  * While I'm at it, I also though it would be a good idea to create a
>  * whoel $(PREFIX-DEVEL) directory structure, so that accessing two
>  * version of one port would be easier. That is obviously limited to two
>  * versions of a port, but would make compiling non-port software against
>  * devel ports (i.e. GNOME against gtk11) much easier. Has this been
>  * discussed before?
>  * 
>  * Martin
>  * -- 
>  * %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
>  * Martin Cracauer <cracauer@cons.org> http://www.cons.org/cracauer
>  *   Tel.: (private) +4940 5221829 Fax.: (private) +4940 5228536
>  *   Paper: (private) Waldstrasse 200, 22846 Norderstedt, Germany
>  * 
>  * To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
>  * with "unsubscribe freebsd-ports" in the body of the message
>  * 
>  * 
> 

-- 
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
Martin Cracauer <cracauer@cons.org> http://www.cons.org/cracauer
  Tel.: (private) +4940 5221829 Fax.: (private) +4940 5228536
  Paper: (private) Waldstrasse 200, 22846 Norderstedt, Germany

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?19980826131115.C18242>