HOW-TO get Flash7 working!

[Boris Samorodov]

On Wed, 16 Jan 2008 14:34:23 -0500 Chuck Robey wrote:
> Boris Samorodov wrote:
> > On Tue, 15 Jan 2008 16:10:15 -0500 Chuck Robey wrote:
> > 
> >> All those libraries need to be found
> >> by the flash9 plugin library.
> > 
> > Please, give me strict instructions how to repeate (what to do
> > after a fresh install):
> > -----
> > 0. Fresh RELENG_X_Y install.
> > 2. Fresh ports (or date=...).
> > 3. ...

> I said at the very beginning of this thread, that I didn't keep track of
> what I did, because the tack I took was to relocate all of the libs to the
> /compat tree, and this sort of strategy can't be taken until I could get
> official approval of that as the correct method to take for installation of
> Linux libraries.

Catch 22? You won't do anything without official approvement but you
won't get an official approvement without proving you are right...

> If I got that approval, I said I would undertake to
> locate and fix all of the ports that currently install Linux stuff into the
> /usr/local tree, and then make the flash9 work.  This sort of tack can't be
> attempted, unless I could show the port authors involved that I have
> official approval to get this thing done, so they could either approve of
> the diffs I would give them, or argue it with the port managers themselves.
>  What I never, ever intended to try, was to force things in any way, that's
> acting childishly.  I just needed a official hammer that was morally strong
> enough to get things moving.

Please, prove that you are right. Or do you want to receive a hammer
without doing it?

> In fact, if it were understood that I was to get that sort of ruling in
> advance, then I would agree to submit complete diffs, in advance of the

Patches will be good, but firstly it would be enough to give just
instructions which one can follow (see a quote at the very
beginning).

> work, both so folks could look at them, and so it could be proven that this
> strategy does indeed get the flash9 working.  I'm not terribly worried
> about doing that, because I did it on my system already, and the only worry
> for me is if things (in the meantime) might have changed enough to make
> this no longer possible.

> But without that?  I would be condemned to endless arguments, in order to
> effect all the changes, and I don't like arguing that much.  No, I am not
> going to contribute to a tack that I feel is wrong-headed.  I won't get in
> your way, but I wouldn't contribute to that.

> I hope that's a reasonably honest approach.  To be REALLY stict about it,
> what I'm most strict about is getting all Linux libraries into the /compat
> tree, and probably doing that alone would be sufficient, but I'm trying
> here for the whole boat, moving all Linux things into /compat, as the
> hier(7) dictates (as I read it),

Hier gurus may not read ports at .

> and for the reasons that I've given
> endlessly by now.

I didn't see any _proved_ reason. Is there somebody out there who did?

> In fact, I think it's a fact that I've really given this all the airing
> that's really needed.  If folks can't see it's needed after all this, then
> go ahead and live with it, as long as I can make my system my way.  I will
> no longer feel bad about it, I gave it a fair try at sharing what I felt
> was the right way to do things.  I have asked a bunch of times (both in
> this thread, and in one direct mail to them) to get one of the port
> managers to issue a ruling, but I think I will take being ignored as a de
> facto ruling.  I don't wish to harangue folks any longer.

Actually, I don't understand what you don't understand. The thread
becomes a little bit annoying to me. :-(

If can prove that you are right just do it. Please.
If you can't (or don't want or else) it's also OK. Please.


WBR
-- 
Boris Samorodov (bsam)
Research Engineer, http://www.ipt.ru Telephone & Internet SP
FreeBSD committer, http://www.FreeBSD.org The Power To Serve