From owner-svn-ports-head@freebsd.org Wed Jun 13 09:28:28 2018 Return-Path: Delivered-To: svn-ports-head@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 453CA1018761; Wed, 13 Jun 2018 09:28:28 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from danfe@freebsd.org) Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (freefall.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:6074::16:84]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "freefall.freebsd.org", Issuer "Let's Encrypt Authority X3" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EB05A7724C; Wed, 13 Jun 2018 09:28:27 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from danfe@freebsd.org) Received: by freefall.freebsd.org (Postfix, from userid 1033) id E3882C9F4; Wed, 13 Jun 2018 09:28:27 +0000 (UTC) Date: Wed, 13 Jun 2018 09:28:27 +0000 From: Alexey Dokuchaev To: Yuri Cc: ports-committers@freebsd.org, svn-ports-all@freebsd.org, svn-ports-head@freebsd.org Subject: Re: svn commit: r472232 - in head/x11-toolkits/wxgtk31: . files Message-ID: <20180613092827.GA41680@FreeBSD.org> References: <201806120717.w5C7HA1e005551@repo.freebsd.org> <20180612113434.GA75210@FreeBSD.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.5 (2018-04-13) X-BeenThere: svn-ports-head@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.26 Precedence: list List-Id: SVN commit messages for the ports tree for head List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 13 Jun 2018 09:28:28 -0000 On Tue, Jun 12, 2018 at 10:58:53AM -0700, Yuri wrote: > On 06/12/18 04:34, Alexey Dokuchaev wrote: > > Can we have both GTK+2/3 support? OPTION would be nice. I have a port > > that was blocked by lack of wxgtk31, but GTK+3 is a no-go for me.:-( > > If to make Gtk2 vs. Gtk3 choice to be a flavor, so that individual ports > would be able to select the flavor, this would be impossible. wxWidgets > isn't designed to be concurrently installed for Gtk2/Gtk3. There are > files that wxWidgets installs that aren't labeled with "gtkN", and there > obviously would be conflicts between the packages if they would choose > different flavors. I'll let mat@ to comment here since he suggested flavors (which I have nothing against, I just don't know whether flavors can be mutually conflicting, etc.). > If to make Gtk2 vs. Gtk3 choice to be a port option, then virtually all > users would just stay with Gtk3, because there would be no reasons > functionality-wise to choose Gtk2. So you would likely be the only user > of the Gtk2 option, and this option would not be for the benefit of users. I doubt that I would be the only one, that's rather bold statement to make. Regardless of that, however, I fail to understand why "option would not be for the benefit of users". Even if most users prefer Gtk3, make it the default. Problem solved. Right now it reads as "fuck you gtk2'ers". :-( > If you just want to use wxWidgets for the port, you only need to set > USE_WX=3.1, and then use ${WX_CONFIG} and ${WXRC_CMD} to configure the > project. If some project hard-codes the config name executables, this > is a bug in that project. No, this is not the case, they use some API functions which are not available in 3.0, that's why I was not abale to update it before 3.1 hit the tree. > Gtk2/Gtk3 choice is nicely abstracted away from the users, and there > should be no reason to break this abstraction and bring the gtk notion > into the ports using wxWidgets. I don't understand. How do you mean? Can I run wxWidgets ports without Gtk+ at all? ./danfe