Date: Fri, 7 May 2004 14:15:24 -0700 From: Ade Lovett <ade@FreeBSD.org> To: Fernan Aguero <fernan@iib.unsam.edu.ar> Cc: daniel@roe.ch Subject: Re: gnuplot update: almost ready but ... how to deal with autotools? Message-ID: <A7BE8D96-A06B-11D8-99E2-000A956B6386@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <20040507205532.GA6448@iib.unsam.edu.ar> References: <20040507205532.GA6448@iib.unsam.edu.ar>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
As I have previously stated, time and time and time again on the ports@=20= mailing list, I am waiting on a major update to bsd.autotools.mk, with=20= widespread changes across the entire ports tree. This takes time to test, and is not likely to happen until (a) 4.10-REL=20= is out the door and (b) I get some quality time with bento and its=20 4-exp package run. User-created symlinks are absolutely NOT the way to go, you WILL hose=20 your system eventually, and is COMPLETELY UNSUPPORTED. I suggest that you hold off on this update until the next round of=20 autotools updates are completed, when autoconf259 and automake18 will=20 be available via the normal autotools Makefile-knobs. -aDe On May 07, 2004, at 13:55, Fernan Aguero wrote: > Hi! > > I have an almost ready update to get gnuplot to the latest > 4.0 version. > > For me, this all started because I needed some functionality > that could only be obtained with a couple of patches. So I > decided to include the patches in the port, if the user > decides that he wants this functionality (by setting an > appropriate WITH_HISTOGRAMS variable). > > The problem, as explained in a previous post is that after > applying these patches I need to run autoconf. > = http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-ports/2004-April/011943.html > http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-ports/2004-May/012010.html > > One of the responses to my post suggested creating symlinks > of the kind autoconf -> autoconf259, automake -> automake18, > and so on ... This helped me solve the problem. My port now > builds fine, but this is clearly not the way that a decent > port should behave, isn't it? :) > > Right now, the port is marked as BROKEN if WITH_HISTOGRAMS > is set. But for testing you can comment this line of the > Makefile. > > I am now using: > WANT_AUTOCONF_VER=3D 253 > WANT_AUTOMAKE_VER=3D 17 > in my port, and this actually works (I have both 253 and 17 > installed), even though the symlinks are actually > autoconf->autoconf259 and automake->automake18. > I have tried to set WANT_AUTOCONF_VER > to 259 but it seems th=E6t this version has not been included into > bsd.autotools.mk yet. > > My question: should I submit a PR with the port in its > current state? (if nobody sets WITH_HISTOGRAM, the port is > OK; and as I explained above, WITH_HISTOGRAM is new > functionality that was not in the previous gnuplot, so there > is really nothing lost). > > My request: I really need someone to show me how to work > with autoconf from within the ports system. For some reason > just setting WANT_AUTO*_VER was not enough and I had to > create the symlinks for the port to build. Is this something > that is being worked on? Perhaps I should wait for some > large structural things to happen with autotools and try to > fix this again in some near future? Thanks in advance for > shedding any light on this. > > Fernan > > PS1: a gzipped tar archive of the updated port can be found > in http://genoma.unsam.edu.ar/~fernan/freebsd/gnuplot.html > > PS2: I already contacted the maintainer on April 22nd but I > got no reply yet. > > --=20 > F e r n a n A g u e r o > http://genoma.unsam.edu.ar/~fernan >
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?A7BE8D96-A06B-11D8-99E2-000A956B6386>