Subject: Re: X11_TYPE=modular and no X11BASE
To: None <firstname.lastname@example.org>
From: Joerg Sonnenberger <email@example.com>
Date: 11/11/2006 14:38:34
On Wed, Nov 08, 2006 at 08:02:01PM -0600, Jeremy C. Reed wrote:
> Few questions:
> 1) I set X11_TYPE to modular and building new x11/libXrender failed with:
> ===> Creating toolchain wrappers for libXrender-0.9.2
> Syntax error: word unexpected (expecting ")")
> *** Error code 2
> I saw that X11BASE was not defined. I set it to /usr/pkg and that error
> went away.
Yes, I haven't changed that part of the infrastrcture yet.
> 2) Also, I see that some packages do not work with "modular" until they
> are updated. For my modular-xorg I made x11.buildlink3.mk work with that
> and just suck in my entire modular-xorg metapackage. That worked great for
> many packages for me.
> Any plan to do something like that? Or will we just update one package at
> a time? (I am asking because I have updates for wm/jwm and editors/lyx-qt
> to commit.)
No, I explicitly do *not* want to do that. Basically, every include of
mk/x11.b3.mk will be replaced by proper includes of the various
libraries, but give me some time for that.
> 3) Also I noticed that libXpm and xpm are in different categories and
> libXft and Xft2 are in different categories? Was that an oversite -- or
> will they be moved to graphics and fonts respectively?
No, it is intentional. I think both are first X11 programs/libraries and
only secondly graphic/font programs/libraries, that's why. Neither makes
much sense without X11 (even though libXpm could be built without). I
haven't cleaned up the duplicates for now intentionally, as I want to
keep the impact for !modular minimal for now.