editors/abiword-devel -- 2.3.2 is now available

Jeremy Messenger mezz7 at cox.net
Wed Jul 13 23:02:09 GMT 2005


On Wed, 13 Jul 2005 17:51:54 -0500, Mikhail Teterin  
<Mikhail.Teterin at murex.com> wrote:

> середа 13 липень 2005 18:24, Jeremy Messenger Ви написали:
>> grep for 'png' isn't good enough, 'png.5' is bettter. What make you  
>> think  
>> everybody have the INDEX? I don't have any here.
>
> Try ``cd /usr/ports; make fetchindex''...

No. I don't need it.

>> > So, there is no advantage in keeping the shared library numbers there,
>> > but there is a significant disadvantage -- the users are required
>> > to upgrade all changed dependencies, whenever they want to build  
>> abiword.
>>
>> I am expecting them to. People that keep old stuff and build new source  
>>  
>> that depend on old stuff cause a lot of problems, so force the habit of  
>> it
>> to upgrade all new dependencies before you install anything new in port
>> is good.
>
> X Window developers famously went through a similar debate in their  
> times --
> decades ago. The prevailed point of view was to provide MECHANISM, NOT
> POLICY. I urge you to recognize this point's wisdom.
>
> Your idea is impractical too. Say I just built/installed the KDE suite.  
> The
> next day I updated the ports tree and the graphics/png got updated (and  
> so,
> duly, did abiword). Do you think, it is right to demand, that I rebuild  
> the
> whole KDE again (all the way up from Qt) in order to be able to add  
> abiword
> to my perfectly functional system?
>
> Nobody does that and nobody should be forced to. AbiWord surely does not  
> care
> -- as long as png.h matches the libpng.so, it will be just fine.
>
>> Check in bsd.*.mk and other ports. They all do the same things on
>> different libraries.
>
> I was referring to my having to explain the impossibility of ABI
> incompatibilities, as long as headers match the libraries.
>
> But yes, I know. There is no rational explanation for this (you are not
> offering one either) -- just inertia... There are plenty of  
> counter-examples
> too, however:
>
> 	find /usr/ports/ -name Makefile | xargs fgrep LIB_DEPENDS | fgrep -v .

I talked with three peoples in IRC, they all prefer to make all of the lib  
versions fully-qualified to help with PORTREVISION bumps. They said that  
this isn't a big deal. Therefore, AbiWord's Makefile (LIB_DEPENDS part)  
stays same way as it is.

Oh btw, marcus said that "We have no mandate either way, and it's the  
discretion of the porter."

Cheers,
Mezz

> Yours,
>
> 	-mi


-- 
mezz7 at cox.net  -  mezz at FreeBSD.org
FreeBSD GNOME Team
http://www.FreeBSD.org/gnome/  -  gnome at FreeBSD.org


More information about the freebsd-gnome mailing list