On Wed, Aug 29, 2012 at 03:36:14PM +0200, David Coppa wrote: > On Wed, Aug 29, 2012 at 3:30 PM, Brad Smith <b...@comstyle.com> wrote: > > On Wed, Aug 29, 2012 at 03:17:07PM +0200, David Coppa wrote: > >> On Wed, Aug 29, 2012 at 3:11 PM, Brad Smith <b...@comstyle.com> wrote: > >> > On Wed, Aug 29, 2012 at 02:17:47AM -0600, David Coppa wrote: > >> >> > >> >> Remove stupid hack and sync with devel/libev. > >> >> > >> >> OK? > >> > > >> > This should be using devel/libev not an internal copy. > >> > >> You're saying I should hack urxvt to use the external libev from > >> devel/libev? > >> I could give a try, but I fear it would be invasive... > > > > That's fine. This is far from the first time ports have been modified to use > > external copies of libraries because upstream didn't do things properly. > > Since > > this is still a maintained and active project the port maintainer can work > > with > > the authors upstream to have them add a proper autoocnf option to allow > > building > > with a system copy of libev. > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=672396
Incredibly stupid, especially when the projects with the incompatible internal copies are from the author of the library. Taking that into consideration I'm OK with the diff until a sane and more ideal solution can be implemented. -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner, and is believed to be clean.
