Date: Sat, 11 Apr 2009 23:00:54 -0400 From: David Schultz <das@FreeBSD.ORG> To: Norikatsu Shigemura <nork@FreeBSD.ORG> Cc: Stanislav Sedov <stas@FreeBSD.ORG>, svn-src-head@FreeBSD.ORG, svn-src-all@FreeBSD.ORG, src-committers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: svn commit: r190943 - head/include Message-ID: <20090412030054.GA54299@zim.MIT.EDU> In-Reply-To: <20090412021841.673a200b.nork@FreeBSD.org> References: <200904111657.n3BGvpsC092703@svn.freebsd.org> <20090411210702.ce5325b9.stas@FreeBSD.org> <20090412021841.673a200b.nork@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sun, Apr 12, 2009, Norikatsu Shigemura wrote: > On Sat, 11 Apr 2009 21:07:02 +0400 > Stanislav Sedov <stas@freebsd.org> wrote: > > > Log: > > > GNU Pth has some fragile kludges that were broken by r189828. > > > I've discussed this with the Pth maintainer and no clear solution > > > has emerged on the ports side of things, so for now, hack around > > > the issue in signal.h. > > Can't we just put a patch in ports tree itself? What meant under 'no > > clean solution emerged'? I can prepare a patch, if needed. > > I think so, too. I have a quick hack patch. As I mentioned to vd@ on 3/20, I'd prefer something like that. Does your proposed patch also work for the ports that depend on GNU Pth, some of which may depend on signal.h?
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20090412030054.GA54299>