HEADS UP: New gconf key policy

Pav Lucistnik pav at oook.cz
Thu Jun 24 00:59:50 PDT 2004

V čt, 24. 06. 2004 v 03:20, Joe Marcus Clarke píše:

> Please take a look at the latest update to archivers/fileroller, and let
> me know what you think.  This is the new gconf policy I think we need to
> adopt if we're to survive the upcoming gconf changes in GNOME 2.8 (it's
> similar to the way we handle OMF files now).  This will also make gconf
> handling much more robust with respect to plists.
> The one downside I see with this is that we will miss Makefile bugs that
> prevent proper schema installation.  One way around that is to add a
> pkg-install script to each port that installs gconf schemas, and do
> gconf registration there.  This may be more work than it's worth,
> though.
> What are people's thoughts on this?  Thanks.

Packing lists on diet! I prefer @exec/@unexec in pkg-plist over
pkg-install script, that would be bloat. Maybe add a check to portlint
to spit a correct @exec and @unexec lines if they're missing, so porters
don't have to refer to docs for the exact syntax of invocation? Just
like .omf files have it.

Pav Lucistnik <pav at oook.cz>
              <pav at FreeBSD.org>

Do not meddle in the fashions of wizards,
for they are seasonal and quick to fall out of style!
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 187 bytes
Desc: Toto je =?iso-8859-2?Q?digit=E1ln=EC?=
	=?ISO-8859-1?Q?_podepsan=E1?= =?iso-8859-2?Q?_=E8=E1st?=
Url : http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-gnome/attachments/20040624/d417d6a4/attachment.bin

More information about the freebsd-gnome mailing list