> maybe it is better to run staroffice60 under linux_base-7, but, IMHO,
> if it
> works under linux_base, that is the way to go until linux_base-7 is
> fixed.
It can't be fixed until I know the problems with it.
> > > also works w/ linux_base, so, why not just switching it to use
> > > linux_base
> > > instead of linux_base-7 and to switch all linux ports to
> > > linux_base-7 when they will be right to use it. the *right*
> > > alternative, of course,
> >
> > They can use it with little modification. Most only require you
> > changing the dependency in the Makefile
>
> why this is not done until linux_base-7 is fixed (read the RH shared
> libs).
Who knows if it will get fixed.
> how about changing :
>
> DEPENDS= .../linux_base-7
>
> by something like this :
>
> .if defined(WANT_LINUX_BASE_7)
> FETCH_DEPENDS=
> ${LINUXBASE}/usr/X11R6/lib/libXrender.so.1.0:${PORTSDIR}/emulators/lin
> ux_base-7
> BUILD_DEPENDS=
> ${LINUXBASE}/usr/X11R6/lib/libXrender.so.1.0:${PORTSDIR}/emulators/lin
> ux_base-7
> .else
> USE_LINUX= yes
> .endif
>
> so, anybody would be happy, no ?
That's one option, but that doesn't appear to be the path that I was
told would be taken on this project.
>
> > > would be to fix linux_base-7 to be linux_base compatible... but
> > > nobody care and everybody seems to considere normal what's
> > > happen !!!
> >
> > Its not that linux_base-7 isn't "linux_base" compatible its that
> > redhat 7 has a shared lib bug. We will have to use some of
> > linux_base6's libc5 for
>
> are you saying that RH7 users can't run netscape 4.79 and so ?
No, you can symlink libstdc++ that netscape is looking for to what
exists
> > those ports which actually require it, but we can't even get a
> > grasp on what doesn't work under linux_base7 because we can't get
> > enough details about what doesn't work. Most people just say "it
> > doesn't work, linux_base-7 sucks". The reality is that
> > linux_base-6 will go away because we are
>
> it is the case, no ;-)
From what I've been hearing linux-base(6.x) is > < close to being
removed.
> my opinion is that we don't have to jump to something which works in
> one
> case and fails in all others. if that happen, it is preferable to
> stay as is until
> everything work fine w/ the new things. this has a name, QUALITY and
> doing things the way "you" made it is the wrong way. it is a real
> pain
> to not have -current, -stable and -release port tree to avoid such
> problems.
>
It can be a pain, but we cannot blame that for not making progress.
Most important things work under linux_base-7. I only have one
report that someone can't get staroffice to work under linux_base-7.
Where are all these problems you are talking about. I can't fix
them if I don't have details.
--
David W. Chapman Jr.
dwcjr@inethouston.net Raintree Network Services, Inc. <www.inethouston.net>
dwcjr@freebsd.org FreeBSD Committer <www.FreeBSD.org>
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-ports" in the body of the message