Brasero on FreeBSD

[Chuck Robey]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Joe Marcus Clarke wrote:
> On Tue, 2008-01-01 at 03:52 +0000, Luis Medinas wrote:
>> Hi
>>
>> As a co-maintainer of Brasero i'm tempted to ask why FreeBSD hasn't
>> brasero 0.7.0 on the ports tree. None of us are using FreeBSD sadly but
>> we can work together to make it work better for FreeBSD if it isn't
>> working atm. Please bump brasero.
> 
> First, this is very encouraging.  I love it when maintainers make an
> effort to help port their application to another platform.  Thank you.
> 
> Now for the bad news.  We have quite a few users that want to use
> brasero on FreeBSD, but we haven't had anyone step up to fix the
> problems.  Admittedly, I offered to look into this a while ago, but fell
> behind with non-FreeBSD work, and the FreeBSD hal port update.  Here's
> were we stand with brasero now:
> 
> http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=ports/115240 : This looks
> like a problem with brasero overriding PATH for a Linux-centric
> environment.  mkisofs is found in /usr/local/bin on FreeBSD.
> Admittedly, I have not looked into the brasero code to determine if this
> is the case, or if this problem is still relevant in 0.7.0.
> 
> http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=ports/117364 : This is a bit
> nastier.  FreeBSD's cdrecord only supports the legacy bus,target,lun
> notation.  Our HAL exports this address via the block.freebsd.cam_path
> property, and I hacked nautilus-cd-burner to support this property on
> FreeBSD.
> 
> If you have suggestions on these problems, I would be happy to get
> brasero up to 0.7.0 and working properly on FreeBSD.

I didn't know what brasero was, so I wewnt to their website.  I found that
the version number for their stable release is 0.5.2, while I see the ports
is at 0.5.1.  Is it normal, so something like gnome utils (that so many
use) to follow the most recent version, of to follow the most recent
*stable* version?  Note I'm not being fascetious, I really don't know the
answer, but maybe, if one would use the x11/gnome port as a guide, well,
it's running at version 2.20.2, which I think (unless I misread their
website) is their stable release ... but they didn't actually seem to make
any distinction on that site, current versus stable.  I still don't know,
but I think that brasero shouldn't just be automatically be updated to the
current version without deciding that, right?

Or, should the port have a second one, a brasero-current, added?  I know
that either way, a update is needed, but that needed to be looked at, right?

> Joe
> 

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.4 (FreeBSD)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFHeqJyz62J6PPcoOkRAvI+AJ4vti44pUrrT0XUlkAX4VeMIWb96gCeOmZV
S0DuBM4q/Ar9Z1cDxnaDF/k=
=uMoU
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----