From owner-freebsd-ports Mon Feb 10 04:25:52 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id EAA29725 for ports-outgoing; Mon, 10 Feb 1997 04:25:52 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail.crl.com (mail.crl.com [165.113.1.22]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id EAA29716 for ; Mon, 10 Feb 1997 04:25:49 -0800 (PST) Received: from po1.glue.umd.edu by mail.crl.com with SMTP id AA19428 (5.65c/IDA-1.5 for ); Mon, 10 Feb 1997 04:25:04 -0800 Received: from uplink.eng.umd.edu (uplink.eng.umd.edu [129.2.98.181]) by po1.glue.umd.edu (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id HAA23619; Mon, 10 Feb 1997 07:19:03 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost (chuckr@localhost) by uplink.eng.umd.edu (8.8.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id HAA25413; Mon, 10 Feb 1997 07:19:02 -0500 (EST) X-Authentication-Warning: uplink.eng.umd.edu: chuckr owned process doing -bs Date: Mon, 10 Feb 1997 07:19:00 -0500 (EST) From: Chuck Robey X-Sender: chuckr@uplink.eng.umd.edu To: Satoshi Asami Cc: plm@xs4all.nl, freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: tcl 7.6 & tk 4.2 In-Reply-To: <199702100441.UAA21473@silvia.HIP.Berkeley.EDU> Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-ports@freebsd.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk On Sun, 9 Feb 1997, Satoshi Asami wrote: > * I think as soon as the new version 8.0 gets to release level, then you'll > * see an upgrade, but not before that. I don't think it'll be too long, but > * at least a month or two. > > No, there will NOT be an upgrade, at least in the ports tree. > (/usr/src is a different matter, of course.) These ports, if they > were to be put in the ports tree, will go in different directories > (tcl8 and tk8). That's what I meant. > > I believe Jordan (jkh@freebsd.org) is now working exclusively on > modifying his submitted tcl/tk-8.0 ports to make them co-exist with > default ones. I wish him luck, but I'd not ever want that to happen. Other packages that want tcl/tk go about findling the tclConfig.sh and tkConfig.sh, and they always assume that the first one they find is the only one. Putting in two sets of these files would mean that one would be taken over the other. Making sure that the shared libs resulting don't interfere would mean that they'd have to have non-standard names, so that ld.so could find the right one. While it's possible, it means a lot of added problems for the person who just wants to have one lib, the latest release level, to be installed and to work right. I'm not saying it couldn't be done, but I am saying that what would be required to do it wouldn't be a pretty picture. > > Satoshi > ----------------------------+----------------------------------------------- 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! ----------------------------+-----------------------------------------------