Date: Tue, 4 Jan 2000 22:57:41 +0100 From: Thomas Zenker <thz@tuebingen.netsurf.de> To: current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Proposal: Removing doscmd from the source tree... Message-ID: <20000104225739.A865@peotl.tuebingen.netsurf.de> In-Reply-To: <200001041910.MAA61032@harmony.village.org>; from Warner Losh on Tue, Jan 04, 2000 at 12:10:35PM -0700 References: <3871FC69.C99882E9@scc.nl> <200001041910.MAA61032@harmony.village.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, Jan 04, 2000 at 12:10:35PM -0700, Warner Losh wrote: > In message <3871FC69.C99882E9@scc.nl> Marcel Moolenaar writes: > : doscmd breaks cross-building, because it depends on X11 which obviously > : is not in the source tree (see below). I'm proposing to remove doscmd > : from the source tree and make it a port (emulators/doscmd). > > One can build it w/o X11. Doesn't sound like sufficent reason to me > to remove it. > Actually i never used it under X11, but it is very important for us to have it to run cross-compilers (which are only available as DOS binaries) integrated with native development environment under FreeBSD. I am not sure how many people use it this way. But if it is not build in buildworld, it will break after kernel updates and I will have strong wind blowing in my face defending our FreeBSD development environment at work. A possibility could be: 1. build it for i386 only, 2. build it via buildworld without X11, regardless if X11 exists. If I want to use it with X11, it is interactive and I can make it for X11 by hand - it will not break on compile runs at some hour at night. So, my vote against removing. Thomas To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20000104225739.A865>