Subject: Re: gnome, optional or mandatory in pkgsrc?
To: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?C=E9sar_Catri=E1n?= C. <firstname.lastname@example.org>
From: Jeremy C. Reed <email@example.com>
Date: 09/27/2004 19:57:45
On Mon, 27 Sep 2004, [ISO-8859-1] C=E9sar Catri=E1n C. wrote:
> I want to ask if it is possible to indicate in compile time if the
> program that is wanted to compile will be used in GNOME or not.
This sounds like a great idea.
I see that mk/bsd.pkg.defaults.mk has related:
Maybe new mk/bsd.options.mk could be used. Or maybe some USE_GNOME could
be defined and then make the many packages honor it.
The other option is to have separate packages, such as wm/icewm-gnome,
wm/wmx-gnome, chat/xchat-gnome, chat/gaim-gnome, chat/everybuddy-gnome,
misc/celestia-gnome, news/pan-gnome, x11/xscreensaver-gnome. I think
maintaining multiple packages seems like too much work if there is not a
By the way, this gnome idea could also be applied to qt3 and/or kde also.
But I do see that gnome is more prevalent.
> BTW, I've seen several packages commited to pkgsrc with the MANTAINER
> line set to tech-pkg, were you been in agreement that each developer
> that added a package would be in charge of it?
Yes, there should be a MAINTAINER, but I guess in some cases, one or two
people really use the software so it was added, but they aren't willing to
say they will continually maintain it. Luckily, we have several developers
that help with packages with no maintainers.
Jeremy C. Reed
=09 =09 =09 BSD News, BSD tutorials, BSD links
=09 =09 =09 http://www.bsdnewsletter.com/