On Tue, Nov 23, 2010 at 03:42, O. Hartmann <ohart...@mail.zedat.fu-berlin.de> wrote: > On 11/23/10 02:14, Andrew W. Nosenko wrote: >> >> On Mon, Nov 22, 2010 at 22:20, O. Hartmann >> <ohart...@mail.zedat.fu-berlin.de> wrote: >> >> But there lives another problem: Xerces people doesn't expect parallel >> installation of the "evelopment" part of Xerces-C (headers, >> pkg-config, etc). At least it seems so by listing the libxerces-c >> package from Ubuntu. > > I guess so, but some ports of the FreeBSD ports (i.e. textproc/xalan-c) want > xerces-c2 (which is 2.7.0). I try build xalan-c with the new xerces-c3 and > see if it can handle the new header and libraries. > >> >> I see three variants: >> (1) simple: just mark these ports (c2 and c3) as conflicting, > > ... in my testcase I did.
And, for my personal taste, it is the best option. Be close to upstream as much as possible, IMHO, is the best way. >> (2) semi-simple: split each xerces-c port at the two: run-time and >> development. Runtime contains a shered library, development contains >> anything other. Mark development parts as conflictitng. > > ... well, in such a case we converge much to the weird Linux mess, I guess. > >> (3) move each port away from each other's way: move headers into own >> versioned deirectory (e.g. from include/xercesc/ to >> insclude/xercesc-3.1/xercesc/), drop libxerces-c.so (if any -- I don't >> know), rename pkg-config (.pc) file, and static library (if any), may >> be something yet another, like documentation -- need to look at the >> actual install. All these changes hidden from the users through >> pkg-config's .pc, therefore only one problem for developers will be >> changed (non-standard name of the .pc file, i.e. pkg-config's module). > > ... this would bring up other complications for ports expecting libs and > headers at places where the solo installation normally resides. > >> But ATM I see no better way to allow parallel installation of the >> packages that aren't intended for parallel installation by theirs >> authors... > > I tend to install it as a unique port with conflicts activated. Hope there > are no further conflicts other than xalan-c. And I have some feelings that either existing xalan-c able to compile against current xerces-c or there is newer version that able. -- Andrew W. Nosenko <andrew.w.nose...@gmail.com> _______________________________________________ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"