DragonFly BSD
DragonFly users List (threaded) for 2005-04
[Date Prev][Date Next]  [Thread Prev][Thread Next]  [Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: dfports/www/firefox doesn't build :(

From: Bill Hacker <wbh@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sat, 02 Apr 2005 05:18:34 +0800

flybsd.org> <424d287b$0$719$415eb37d@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <424d2ae6$0$717$415eb37d@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <424db0e5$0$718$415eb37d@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
In-Reply-To: <424db0e5$0$718$415eb37d@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Lines: 42
Message-ID: <424dbaab$0$717$415eb37d@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
X-Trace: 1112390315 crater_reader.dragonflybsd.org 717
Xref: crater_reader.dragonflybsd.org dragonfly.users:2621

walt wrote:

> Bill Hacker wrote:
>> ... don't even *think* about GNOME 2.10...
> Just curious why you say that.  I'm running 2.10 which seems to be 
> okay.
> I had to add a little hack here, and a little hack there -- but for 
> the most part no problem.

I have had both the 'upgrade' script fail (FreeBSD 4.11-STABLE) and
even a clean install from the latest FreeBSD ports, where nothing was
there ahead of it but what XFree-86 installed.  FWIW, I even tried it
*without* first installing XFree86, so as to let it specifiy its own
breed of dependencies.  Nothing completes - all stall on a Mozilla
(which I can live without) dependency, as do Moz or Firefox independent
build attempts. Broken FreeBSD port?

OTOH, doing GNOME 2.8, Moz, & Firefox onto DragonFly 27 MAR STABLE
from pkgsrc went beautifully, though I have elected to run Xfce4 instead.

Having seen the bloat-growth in GNOME from 2.4 onward, plus the still-insane
need for re-re-recursion in the most-of-a-day 'upgrade' script, I am
keeping the gtk, but running Xfce4 on it instead of GNOME.

GNOME full-house later than 2.8 I have given up on.  Seems to have
caught 'Windows disease', as it has gotten way too fat and too
expensive as to maintainability.

Xfce4 can run anything GNOME-ish I need for far, far less hassle,
most of it on 1/3 to 1/2 the libs and such, let alone its own leaner
operating footprint.



[Date Prev][Date Next]  [Thread Prev][Thread Next]  [Date Index][Thread Index]