Will Andrews wrote:
> As far as I can tell, the KDE ports find Qt just fine. KDE insists on
> putting everything under the same dir, as does Qt. This violates our
> hierarchy (see hier(7) manpage), so we had to make some mods to the
> configurations for Qt and KDE ports. It's not that difficult.
This is good if you build/install KDE by hand, instead of using the
source. Having everything under /usr/local/kde makes it real easy to
uninstall w/out package management; all you do is rm -rf
/usr/local/kde. Same goes for Qt: rm -rf /usr/local/qt.
BTW, why does the ports system insist on installing Gtk in
/usr/X11R6/lib? Almost every other app that you compile by hand
expects Gtk in /usr/local/lib. I hardly think we should be putting
every X11 dependent software package in /usr/X11R6. The exceptions
are the "old" traditional software, such as Motif, that programs
expect to see in /usr/X11R6. "xv" is another one of these apps, and
it's OK to put that in /usr/X11R6 as well. But, I don't think it's a
good idea to be installing ALL X11 dependent stuff there, unless the
port uses imake/xmkmf.
I think the ports system should stick the "natural flow" of things --
imake stuff -->/usr/X11R6. GNU/configure generated stuff
-->/usr/local. Why put everything in /usr/X11R6? Just go with the
flow, man. Yes, I do agree with putting Lesstif in /usr/X11R6,
because, IMHO, it's one of the exceptions. Motif dependent stuff
_expects_ Motif libs there. Most non-ports software packages expect
Gtk in /usr/local/lib. Likewise, non-ports compiled from source
expect Qt in /usr/local/qt.
So, I installed Gtk in /usr/local/lib, as that is its "natural"
place. I built Gtk from ports initially, and Mozilla couldn't find
it, because it was expected in /usr/local. Instead, it was in
/usr/X11R6. Why? Every non-port expects Gtk in /usr/local. That's
certainly where *I* expected it. It's in the natural scheme of
things.
I think there should be an option for ports, something like:
COMPATIBLE_WITH_NON_PORTS. So, it would give us guys who use a
mixture of ports/non-ports geater flexibility. Stuff would be allowed
in their "natural" places, even if it means violating hier. Again, it
would be an option for us who want Gtk, Qt, KDE, etc. in their
"natural", non-ports conforming, hier-violating habitat
> If you're gonna use a port, use ports for its dependencies too. You'd be
> stupid not to use the ports whenever you can. No one has ever provided
> me a convincing reason why this is not true.
Excuse me, but I like to compile my own software by hand every once in
a while, thank you very much. The ports system's way of doing things
is causing conflicts with software NOT installed by ports. See my
example above.
Who cares if we violate hier? Sure, we should avoid it whenever
possible, and it's great because it allows us to run a tight ship. I
myself hated installing both Netscape libs and binaries in
/usr/local/netscape. It's stupid to see something like
/usr/local/netscape/netscape to run netscape. It's idiotic, to be
sure. But, the Linux version of Netscape is broken in that java won't
work unless you put netscape in that exact location. Yes, I tried
setting MOZILLA_HOME and all kind of other stuff, and that wouldn't
work either. The FreeBSD version didnt' have this bug, though.
So, I think it's OK to "give" a little on violating hier. Nothing in
this world is perfect. Some of us like to maximize compatibility with
other "strange" stuff. As for violating hier, I think it's OK to use
a little "fuzzines" factor in doing so (e.g. kde, qt, netscape, etc.).
- Donn
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
