Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2000 10:41:13 +0300 From: Maxim Sobolev <sobomax@FreeBSD.org> To: Jeremy Lea <reg@FreeBSD.org>, ports@FreeBSD.org, asami@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: Problems with bsd.gnome.mk [patch] Message-ID: <39E2C818.59B1E871@FreeBSD.org> References: <39E184FE.7FCE1E41@FreeBSD.org> <20001009094132.H30468@shale.csir.co.za> <39E2AFE2.EF3DE9D0@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Maxim Sobolev wrote: > > I'm not entirely sure that preventing this behaviour is a good thing. > > It leads to Gnome apps being ported in two possible ways: Patching to > > remove /gnome from after datadir and helpdir, and patching to add /gnome > > after pixmapdir. Solving the problem from a port's perspective is also > > fairly simple. You define WANT_GNOME, and then test HAVE_GNOME and > > define USE_GNOME. You can then use %%DATADIR%% to get the correct PLIST > > entries. I do not see any benefits of this setup for ports with only optional GNOME support. In additional to my previous example with sawfish themes, for example xmms - it's in GNOME case only installs small applet, and IMHO it's not necessary to move the whole share/xmms into share/gnome. It's definitely not worth in this case to pollute pkg-plist with %%DATADIR%%, which creates additional headache in the case when you have to upgrade the port. Please make GNOME's CONFIGURE_ARGS optional! -Maxim To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-ports" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?39E2C818.59B1E871>