linux-flashplayer running

Thu Dec 20 11:38:45 PST 2007

On Thu, 20 Dec 2007 11:20:58 -0600, Chuck Robey <chuckr at chuckr.org> wrote:

> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Jeremy Messenger wrote:
>> On Wed, 19 Dec 2007 15:43:42 -0600, Chuck Robey <chuckr at chuckr.org>  
>> wrote:
>>
>> Oh, I'm in trouble now.  I was getting a bit frustrated, because all the
>> different names that my browsers hide under, and the fact that 2 other
>> items
>> confuse things:
>>
>> 1) the config dirs aren't always named after the program, and
>>
>>> Please complain it to the developers that create this program. It  
>>> wasn't
>>> our idea.
>>
>> 2) the G_D_ ports often installed things into /usr/local/ even for linux
>> things, and other times into /compat, and that terribly screws things  
>> up.
>>
>>> I don't know what 'G_D_ ports' is.
>
> Sorry, it's not my job to interpret, and it's rather small of you to  
> think so
> (LOL).
>
>>
>> Why am I complaining?  Because now, for Linux-firefox, I do have the
>> flashplayer.9 working, but with all the screwing around I couldn't
>> duplicate
>> it.  The problem was initially the flashplayer, because the version
>> in  ports
>> no longer even exists.  I went to the Adobe site, and just got the
>> latest.
>> Then, the version of libdl that Linux-firefox wants is not only  
>> different
>> thanthe version that the flashplayer wants, they (I think) aren't always
>> looking in the same dir for it.
>>
>> Whatever, it CAN be done, because I did it.
>>
>> Boy, I wish that the portsmeisters would (once and for all, plublicly)
>> decide
>> that linux libs have to install into the /compat/linux tree.  If they
>> would go
>> on record for that, I would begin fixing ports to obey it.  Can't do
>> that now.
>>
>>> I see all Linux libraries that I have installed are in /compat/linux/*
>>> by ports tree. If it doesn't in your case, then please complain to the
>>> right maintainer.
>
> Actually (and I have complained about it recently, but you must have  
> missed
> it) you assertion that all ports follow thatplacement rule is absolutely
> false.  How did you happen to come to that conclusion?  Because you saw  
> one do
> that?  Or, because you found some written rule, and you assumed it was  
> being
> followed?  You need to be at least a little more thorough in checking the
> truth, when making these statements, because it's being flouted by more  
> than
> just a few Linux ports.

I work with Linux ports a lot in the past. I did some help on linux-gtk2,  
linux-fontconfig or linux-freetype, acrobat and a few etc to test, report  
and suggest to tweak. Current, I am maintaining linux-opera and used to  
maintain linux-aspell. Put Linux libraries in /compat/linux makes sense  
and is correct way to me.

# cd /usr/ports/textproc/linux-aspell/
# make -V PREFIX
/compat/linux
# cd ../../x11-toolkits/linux-gtk2/
# make -V PREFIX
/compat/linux
# cd ../../x11-fonts/linux-fontconfig/
# make -V PREFIX
/compat/linux

As you have pointed 'more ports', my suggest still stands by contact to  
the right maintainers and explain to them the reasons why put in  
/compat/linux is best way to do.

> Anyhow, what I was after was getting the folks who have the say so  
> (those in
> ports control, and also ports committers) to make a public decision that  
> the
> method of file layout i am asking for is in fact the only one that is
> approved.  Like I say in my post, if this were put into a post, I would  
> point
> to it, when I get busy correcting various ports which currently do not  
> follow
> that rule.  I need the public support before I try to correct things.   
> I'm
> willing to do the work, but not willing to fight the battle, so things  
> will
> remain the way they are until I get a ruling on this.

Ok, I am sure that most of us are looking forward for your patches.

>>> Not single of your complains have to do with freebsd-multimedia at .
>
> Is implementing Flash on Linux-firefox a multimedia topic?  I think so,  
> and if
> this request isn't acted upon, sooner or later, things will not be  
> improved
> (at least not by me).

I am just point you to contact to the correct maintainer to get better  
result. A few of your emails don't get good result because you didn't  
contact to the maintainers. If you send to multimedia@ plus CC maintainer  
and I will silence.

Q: With your #1 complain, what can we do when the developers decided to  
have different name of config?
A: Nothing, all you can do is to request to the developers to see if they  
can make changes.

Q: With your #2 complain, how can non-maintainer can do?
A: Nothing, all you can do is to contact to the maintainers and make some  
request. There is rule that non-maintainer can't commit other ports  
without permission. If they disagree, ask @freebsd-emulation to see if  
they can help you to get maintainers' mind change.

> I don't know why you're so angry, but I don't think anything *I* did is  
> the cause.

Nah, I am not angry. Don't know why you think that way. I am not very good  
on English, so maybe it's why.

Cheers,
Mezz

>>> Cheers,
>>> Mezz
>>
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v2.0.4 (FreeBSD)
> Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
>
> iD8DBQFHaqR6z62J6PPcoOkRAqm4AJ4gU/4CGsKO4n4QAnG2MT5fVPas1ACbBWx2
> 2WXLKBm/AeWr1e/60NTtr8Q=
> =9pZn
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

-- 
mezz7 at cox.net  -  mezz at FreeBSD.org
FreeBSD GNOME Team  -  FreeBSD Multimedia Hat (ports, not src)
http://www.FreeBSD.org/gnome/  -  gnome at FreeBSD.org
http://wiki.freebsd.org/multimedia  -  multimedia at FreeBSD.org