Hi, On 18.12.2011 03:22, Robert Millan wrote: > Unless upstream can be persuaded to take a different direction, my > only suggestion is to make gnome-shell a Linux-only package by setting > its Architecture field to "linux-any". > > Sorry that I can't offer a better solution. Maybe someone else can. > In any case I wouldn't want kFreeBSD support to put testing migration > of gnome-shell on hold (but feel free to disagree). Unfortunately it's a bit more complicated than that, as our meta packages like gnome-core or gnome-session are modelled around gnome-shell, especially gnome-session. If we go the route of marking gnome-shell linux-any, those meta-package and their inter-dependencies would have to be reworked quite a bit. As a port of NetworkManager is unlikely, the only remaining option I see, is that we try to make the NM integration in gnome-shell optional. But this needs someone running gnome-shell on kfreebsd and who would be willing to help with testing and fixing the issues that will come up. So far we don't even know if anyone has been running gnome-shell successfully on kfreebsd (i.e. the 3.0 version, without the NM dependency) Cheers, Michael -- Why is it that all of the instruments seeking intelligent life in the universe are pointed away from Earth?
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature