Date: Fri, 11 Apr 1997 17:25:32 -0500 (EST) From: pgiffuni@fps.biblos.unal.edu.co To: Chuck Robey <chuckr@glue.umd.edu> Cc: FreeBSD Ports <FreeBSD-Ports@FreeBSD.ORG> Subject: Re: New itcl available Message-ID: <Pine.A41.3.95.970411165729.31522A-100000@fps.biblos.unal.edu.co> In-Reply-To: <Pine.OSF.3.95q.970411170022.17313A-100000@professor.eng.umd.edu>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Argh..the Tcl/Tk distribution nightmare is getting worse... I wanted to port two monsters: * soon-to-be-released Ptolemy 0.7, requires Itcl 2.2 (BTW any one interested in BETA testing should report ASAP to cxh@eecs.berkeley.edu). * PLplot would probably build without Tk if Tcl wouldn't keep getting in the way or if Itcl was available (There are more problems here, I wrote to the author asking for help). This are only MY problems, I'm sure other people building ports also have their own. IMO (flame me if you want) Tcl shouldn't be included in the main distribution, specially since it's (almost) useless without Tk and it's an old version. I understand there are problems with the multiple versions of Tcl/Tk, but importing Tcl simply moves the problem inside. Tcl may also be small, but it has no sense to include it in the base distribution. Ports team: please, let's move again to the old scheme in which everyone chooses the version of Tcl/Tk they want to use. I would even accept drastic solutions, like installation scripts that nuke all previous versions of Tcl/Tk. --Pedro. On Fri, 11 Apr 1997, Chuck Robey wrote: > On Fri, 11 Apr 1997, Pedro Giffuni wrote: > > > Hello Chuck, > > Your Itcl port is a bit outdated as version 2.2 was released in: > > http://www.tcltk.com/ > > > > I know that, but I have a problem with itcl, it seems. Follow me on this > ... > > Itcl patches the tcl and tk distributions, that's why the itcl source tar > is so huge, it completely includes it's own (patched) version of tcl and > tk. It needs extensions to the basic tcl/tk stuff to do it's job, so it > replaces the libs (and the wish executeable) with it's own, and patches > the important tclConfig.sh/tkConfig.sh configuration files. There isn't > any way to get this thing to install AND coexist with any other version of > tcl or tk. > > This in itself isn't bad, because it leaves a totally upwards compatible > tcl/tk in place, but since I couldn't make it sit beside another version > of tcl/tk, and that's what various folks required it to do (in order for > the port to exist) I marked it broken. It compiles fine, installs fine > (at least it did before I tried REAL hard to get it to coexist peacefully, > before I completely understood it) but I won't get agreement on it's > existence, it seems. > > [Don't forget current has tcl as part of itself. It would want to > supplant this too.] > > Unless this is reversed, I'm not going to update it. I don't agree with > the situation, but I see where I could be wrong on this, so I thought I'd > explain the situation publicly. > > If you want things changed, speak up, else I will let it go to sleep > again. > > ----------------------------+----------------------------------------------- > Chuck Robey | Interests include any kind of voice or data > chuckr@eng.umd.edu | communications topic, C programming, and Unix. > 9120 Edmonston Ct #302 | > Greenbelt, MD 20770 | I run Journey2 and picnic, both FreeBSD > (301) 220-2114 | version 3.0 current -- and great FUN! > ----------------------------+----------------------------------------------- > >
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.A41.3.95.970411165729.31522A-100000>