Subject: Re: Status of xpkgwedge?
To: None <email@example.com>
From: John Darrow <John.P.Darrow@wheaton.edu>
Date: 10/07/1999 12:04:12
In article <199910050317.XAA04789@distress.stat.cmu.edu> you write:
>I was wondering as to the status of xpkgwedge? Does it work?
>USE_LOCALBASE_FOR_X11 isn't documented in packages(7) nor in
>mk.conf.example, but xpkgwedge isn't marked IGNORE. I also notice
>there's an open PR on it about incorrectly documenting which
>environment variables a user must override. Can anyone shed light on
> -- Johnny C. Lam <firstname.lastname@example.org>
> Department of Statistics, Carnegie Mellon University
I've been using xpkgwedge since the package system first appeared, and
submitted the xsrc fix (pr xsrc/7326) which made imake packages finally
work with xpkgwedge. However, it hasn't been without some difficulty.
I've got a lot of local patches in my pkgsrc tree to fix packages which
make improper assumptions (directly including X11BASE in install rules,
etc.) which are not valid with xpkgwedge. Send-pr'ing these patches has
been on my one-of-these-days list for a long time now...
I also discovered quite a while ago the necessity of an XPKGBASE variable
(which you recently added and then backed out), as there are a few
non-USE_X11BASE packages which depend on USE_X11BASE packages...
Unfortunately, the presence of xpkgwedge is quite a political issue. Some
people don't want to have to teach non-packaged software to look in
LOCALBASE for added X11 includes, and thus don't want xpkgwedge. Others
(including myself) would rather keep everything that is package-based in
LOCALBASE. (Among other things, this encourages building packages for the
non-packaged software with patches to fix non-portable assumptions, which
then makes it easier for others to install the packages without having to
deal with the same problems...)
I, especially, think that X11BASE is already hard enough to deal with
sanely due to its non-hier(7)-conforming setup, and especially the whole
X11BASE/lib/X11 directory, which contains some things which belong in etc,
some share, possibly some libexec and libdata, and some var... Adding
packages to that mess is just, IMO, The Wrong Thing.
Anyway, that's my two cents on the matter...
John Darrow - Senior Technical Specialist Office: 630/752-5201
Computing Services, Wheaton College, Wheaton, IL 60187 Fax: 630/752-5968
Alphapage: email@example.com Pager: 630/316-0707