Subject: Re: Tcl/Tk again
To: NetBSD packages <tech-pkg@NetBSD.org>
From: Oleg Polyanski <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 03/02/2000 02:19:21
>>>>> "BL" == Bjoern Labitzke writes:
Bjoern, could you please visit
first before committing a PR/package?
BL> Hello... A new Tcl/Tk version is out and I want to switch to
BL> it. Therefor I am going to make a package of it. Last time I tried that
BL> with Tcl/Tk 8.2 there was some resistance. Now I just want to know if it
BL> might be different this time...
BL> I think it makes more sense to have tcl instead of tcl80, tk instead of
BL> tk80 etc. I do not think it is worth the effort to allow for parallel
BL> installations of several Tcl/Tk versions as most poeple will not use
BL> this anyway. Most packages that depend on Tk need wish, therefor I think
BL> it makes sense to make a link from wish8.3 to wish. All those packages
BL> will work at once.
BL> Tkman needs a special patch in Tk. I will integrate that as it has been
BL> in tk80 and as I did in tk (version 8.2). There will arise no problems
BL> of this for other applications. (Or not that I know about...)
BL> I will try to make ical, postgresql, pgaccess, tkinfo, tkirc and
BL> probably a few other things I use to work with the updated Tcl/Tk. I may
BL> even check other packages and send-pr trivial changes.
BL> But I am definitely not interested in doing all this work (esp. for
BL> packages I am not using myself) without a very good chance that the
BL> packages make it into pkgsrc. So, what is needed to get the send-pr'ed
BL> changes committed? What would serve as show stopper?
BL> Thanks in advance for opinions.
BL> Bye, Bjoern
BL> -- Bjoern Labitzke <email@example.com> Use PGP! (Don't you use
BL> envelopes for your letters?)