Date: Fri, 23 Apr 1999 02:32:18 -0400 (EDT) From: Adrian Filipi-Martin <adrian@ubergeeks.com> To: W Gerald Hicks <wghicks@bellsouth.net> Cc: Steve Kargl <sgk@troutmask.apl.washington.edu>, freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG, wghicks@wghicks.bellsouth.net Subject: Re: revisiting Motif policy in ports Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.4.05.9904230222560.3377-100000@thneed.ubergeeks.com> In-Reply-To: <199904230145.VAA74106@bellsouth.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, 22 Apr 1999, W Gerald Hicks wrote: > How about a new DEPENDS_MOTIF (supplied by a port) which might > build Lesstif if HAVE_MOTIF is not set? > > I agree that Lesstif has become useful. (former skeptic) Maybe something a little more flexible. How about replacing REQUIRES_MOTIF with MOTIF_REQUIREMENTS and use the values MOTIF and LESSTIF. Then in the make.conf the users could define HAVE_MOTIF and/or HAVE_LESSTIF as necessary. What I'm getting at here is if Lesstif is a weaker version of Motif that may not work for every package, we should treat the requirements as ranging from strong (true Motif) to weak (works with Lesstif). Of course no one's going to test everything with Lesstif immediately. But as packages are known to work well enough, the requirements can be relaxed. Adrian -- [ adrian@ubergeeks.com -- Ubergeeks Consulting -- http://www.ubergeeks.com/ ] To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.4.05.9904230222560.3377-100000>