From owner-freebsd-ports Sun Aug 3 11:44:52 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id LAA07739 for ports-outgoing; Sun, 3 Aug 1997 11:44:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: from news1.gtn.com (news1.gtn.com [194.77.0.15]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id LAA07708; Sun, 3 Aug 1997 11:44:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from uucp@localhost) by news1.gtn.com (8.7.2/8.7.2) with UUCP id UAA14406; Sun, 3 Aug 1997 20:30:26 +0200 (MET DST) Received: (from andreas@localhost) by klemm.gtn.com (8.8.6/8.8.6) id UAA00719; Sun, 3 Aug 1997 20:17:31 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <19970803201731.09375@klemm.gtn.com> Date: Sun, 3 Aug 1997 20:17:31 +0200 From: Andreas Klemm To: phk@FreeBSD.ORG Cc: ports@FreeBSD.ORG, current@FreeBSD.ORG, Satoshi Asami Subject: Current is currently really a mess (was: Re: Tk/Tcl broken(?)) References: <87lo2pm55s.fsf@ghpc6.ihf.rwth-aachen.de> <199707301149.EAA04990@silvia.HIP.Berkeley.EDU> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Mailer: Mutt 0.79 In-Reply-To: <199707301149.EAA04990@silvia.HIP.Berkeley.EDU>; from Satoshi Asami on Wed, Jul 30, 1997 at 04:49:59AM -0700 X-Disclaimer: A free society is one where it is safe to be unpopular X-Operating-System: FreeBSD 3.0-CURRENT SMP Sender: owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk On Wed, Jul 30, 1997 at 04:49:59AM -0700, Satoshi Asami wrote: > Regarding the Tcl/Tk port (etc.): > > * When I updated tix ysterday evening (comitted in the meantime) I > * noticed that tk41 wants the tcl75 _port_, not tcl75 from the base > * system (someone should upgrade it in 2.2-STABLE or remove it (hi, > * phk)). tcl75 is also missing an entry in CVSROOT/modules. Whoever > * left this mess behind should fix it. > > After the latest fiasco, I am strongly inclined to discontinue support > of -current in the ports tree, at least until the current mess with > tcl is settled. tcl80 is BETA software at the master site, it doesn't > belong to -stable, it doesn't even belong to -current (IMO). It > wasn't tested in the ports tree, and it doesn't even have a > corresponding tk port. Well, after some theory, here comes the praxis. Satoshi, I have fully truely to agree with you, -current is currently a mess. This doesnīt have nothing to do with -currentīs policy "it might break your system" with regards to some days of kernel instability or such ... Every tcl/tk related port is broken in -current, because the tcl 8.0 import seems to break everything. Canīt build _any_ tcl/tk related port in the moment. No tk41, no scotty, couldnīt finish work on an apache port with python support (because python depends on tk41, which doesnīt compile anymore), mrtg, tkman and so on .... I think itīs not intended to make -current to a system, that isnīt useable anymore for active developement work in the ports area, or am I mistaken ??? In the past one of our goals was, to use -current as our playground for new features, but as long as the system is still useable for the other people using -current. Currently -current is not in a useable state regarding active port developement. Ok, I could switch to -STABLE, but would loose SMP support. Oh fellows, this isnīt funny :-/ Andreas /// -- Andreas Klemm | klemm.gtn.com - powered by Symmetric MultiProcessor FreeBSD http://www.freebsd.org/~fsmp/SMP/SMP.html http://www.freebsd.org/~fsmp/SMP/benches.html