Date: Thu, 30 Sep 2004 10:42:14 +0800 From: Gavin Mu <gavin.mu@gmail.com> To: Josh Elsasser <josh@elsasser.org> Cc: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Advice for handling of SWT dependency Message-ID: <70818966040929194252cc7168@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <20040918202511.GA46880@jade.elsasser.org> References: <20040918202511.GA46880@jade.elsasser.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
I think making a separate port of SWT is a good idea, because a lot of applications need it. I have the same trouble with you, I want to make a port for lumaQQ, this is a QQ client in Java and use SWT in it. On Sat, 18 Sep 2004 16:25:11 -0400, Josh Elsasser <josh@elsasser.org> wrote: > I have made a port (http://www.elsasser.org/azureus.tar.gz) which > needs needs some .jar and .so files (the GTK version of SWT) installed > by the java/eclipse port. > > I don't like this because it means I have to mark my port > ONLY_FOR_ARCHES=i386, I have to hard-code a version number in a > directory path into my port, and it forces the user to install a whole > IDE just to get a library that happens to be bundled with it. The way > I have the port set up now will break if the version of eclipse is too > old or too new, or if the user chose to build it with motif instead of > gtk. > > What I want to know is if there's a better way than what I've done. > Should I just forget eclipse and make a separate port of SWT? There > are probably other programs that could use this too. > > -jre > > > >
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?70818966040929194252cc7168>