Date: Thu, 8 May 2014 08:41:50 -0400 From: Geoff Speicher <geoff@sea-incorporated.com> To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Cc: Martin Matuska <mm@freebsd.org>, Joerg Wunsch <joerg@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: devel/binutils and devel/gnulibiberty version mismatch Message-ID: <CAFMeXObnF_yFixBcMA6BVEVyzb-4zcweV80NJfah-mem-YSqag@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <CAFMeXOaFk0OvbA7f7E87P9rre4-FpjTaLGducZTpFGuNtUZNTA@mail.gmail.com> References: <CAFMeXOboxKFjYZpYNt0o0-LRKCfzQgj6_t9wSL0N1mK1LKpKSQ@mail.gmail.com> <CAFMeXOaFk0OvbA7f7E87P9rre4-FpjTaLGducZTpFGuNtUZNTA@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, May 7, 2014 at 12:30 PM, Geoff Speicher
<geoff@sea-incorporated.com>wrote:
> On Wed, May 7, 2014 at 12:05 PM, Geoff Speicher <
> geoff@sea-incorporated.com> wrote:
>
>> devel/binutils is at version 2.24, and as of 16-Dec-2013 no longer
>> installs libiberty [1], but does install libbfd, which gets linked against
>> the copy of libiberty (v2.24) in the build tree.
>>
>> To link an application against libbfd from devel/binutils, one must
>> install devel/gnulibiberty to resolve the missing symbols, but that port
>> uses libiberty from binutils v2.19.1 which doesn't contain all the symbols
>> from v2.24 (e.g. filename_ncmp at a minimum).
>>
>> There is a separate devel/libbfd port that matches the version in
>> devel/gnulibiberty but if your port requires ${LOCALBASE}/libbfd.a and
>> devel/gnulibiberty as build dependencies, and you already have
>> devel/binutils installed, then your port will fail when linking.
>>
>> Should I just mark the port as conflicting with devel/binutils or is
>> there a better workaround for this?
>>
>> [1] http://svnweb.freebsd.org/ports?view=revision&revision=336642
>>
>
> Sorry for responding to myself, but it gets worse: the port I'm working on
> requires gcc from ports (at least on FreeBSD 8.4, because it needs a c++11
> compiler), which depends on devel/binutils, so I can't conflict with
> binutils or else I don't have a compiler.
>
> Is there any reason why devel/libbfd and devel/gnulibiberty shouldn't be
> upgraded to v2.24?
>
>
Joerg, maintainer of devel/libbfd and devel/gnulibiberty (and cc'ed on this
response), and I have come to the conclusion that these two ports should
simply be removed in favor of devel/binutils (maintained by Martin, also
cc'ed). Until recently, only four ports required libbfd and/or
gnulibiberty: devel/avarice <https://www.freshports.org/devel/avarice/>,
emulators/skyeye <https://www.freshports.org/emulators/skyeye/>,
devel/fpc-bfd <https://www.freshports.org/devel/fpc-bfd/>, and
archivers/tardy <https://www.freshports.org/archivers/tardy/>. Joerg
originally created the ports for libbfd and gnulibiberty to support his
port of devel/avarice, but that no longer needs them after the last upgrade
so he just dropped the
dependency<http://svnweb.freebsd.org/ports?view=revision&revision=353276>leaving
only three dependent ports, which can be changed to depend on
devel/binutils <https://www.freshports.org/devel/binutils/>; instead.
Martin/Joerg, would the two of you be willing and able to coordinate to
change binutils so that it installs libiberty.a (and headers) again,
replace the dependencies for those three remaining ports, and remove the
two ports that are no longer needed? Let me know if there is anything I can
do to help.
Geoff
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CAFMeXObnF_yFixBcMA6BVEVyzb-4zcweV80NJfah-mem-YSqag>