From owner-freebsd-emulation@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Feb 15 20:37:23 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: emulation@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D125F16A476; Fri, 15 Feb 2008 20:37:23 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bsam@ipt.ru) Received: from mail.ipt.ru (mail.ipt.ru [194.62.233.102]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 94C9613C4DB; Fri, 15 Feb 2008 20:37:23 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bsam@ipt.ru) Received: from sp34.ipt.ru ([194.62.233.107] helo=bs1.sp34.ru) by mail.ipt.ru with esmtp (Exim 4.62 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1JQ7JC-000AXk-0i; Fri, 15 Feb 2008 23:37:22 +0300 Received: from bsam by bs1.sp34.ru with local (Exim 4.63 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1JQ7KO-0001gV-M3; Fri, 15 Feb 2008 23:38:36 +0300 To: Alexander Leidinger References: <20080213224717.GA59146@freebsd.org> <53884346@ipt.ru> <20080214091408.GA82434@freebsd.org> <43157302@serv3.int.kfs.ru> <20080214194358.5cjdxcll0gook8o8@webmail.leidinger.net> From: Boris Samorodov Date: Fri, 15 Feb 2008 23:38:36 +0300 In-Reply-To: <20080214194358.5cjdxcll0gook8o8@webmail.leidinger.net> (Alexander Leidinger's message of "Thu, 14 Feb 2008 19:43:58 +0100") Message-ID: <96741075@bs1.sp34.ru> User-Agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.0.50 (berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: emulation@freebsd.org Subject: Re: linux gnome libraries etc. X-BeenThere: freebsd-emulation@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Development of Emulators of other operating systems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 15 Feb 2008 20:37:23 -0000 On Thu, 14 Feb 2008 19:43:58 +0100 Alexander Leidinger wrote: > Quoting Boris Samorodov (from Thu, 14 Feb 2008 17:35:21 +0300): > > On Thu, 14 Feb 2008 10:14:08 +0100 Roman Divacky wrote: > >> On Thu, Feb 14, 2008 at 02:41:09AM +0300, Boris Samorodov wrote: > >> > On Wed, 13 Feb 2008 23:47:17 +0100 Roman Divacky wrote: > >> > > >> > > I noticed that linux-pango is version 1.10 (latest is 1.18), > >> > > linux-glib2 is 2.6 (latest is 2.14) etc. etc. > >> > > >> > linux-glib2 is glib2-2.6.6-1, the lastest available for FedoraCore-4: > >> > > >> http://mirror.eas.muohio.edu/fedora/linux/core/updates/4/i386/glib2-2.6.6-1.i386.rpm > >> > > >> > > I tried to run firefox 3 beta 3 under linux emulation and > >> > > it crashed because of some missing symbol in pango and I think > >> > > its because our linux-pango is really outdated and does not > >> > > meet the minimal requirements for firefox3. > >> > > >> > > why havent these ports been updated? > >> > > >> > The port won't ever be updated. More likely a new port, say > >> > linux-f7-glib2 will appear after the default osrelease is switched > >> > to 2.6.x. > I'm not happy with creating a new port, but maybe it is the only good > solution we can do. I didn't think much about installing a different > version depending on the default linux port, but I don't like this > idea much, as it may result in a nightmare. Informed opinions (with a > list of bad things and why it doesn't matter) in favour of this are > welcome. So far I know one idea why it looks bad to me (to have one port) and why I prefer to speak about two ports (actually it means dubbling all linux infrastructure ports): . we won't have packages for non-defaults. WBR -- Boris Samorodov (bsam) Research Engineer, http://www.ipt.ru Telephone & Internet SP FreeBSD committer, http://www.FreeBSD.org The Power To Serve