From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Nov 7 13:39:46 2003 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 96BCA16A4CF for ; Fri, 7 Nov 2003 13:39:46 -0800 (PST) Received: from vexpert.dbai.tuwien.ac.at (vexpert.dbai.tuwien.ac.at [128.131.111.2]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 83BCB43FCB for ; Fri, 7 Nov 2003 13:39:45 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from gerald@pfeifer.com) Received: from [128.131.111.60] (acrux [128.131.111.60]) by vexpert.dbai.tuwien.ac.at (Postfix) with ESMTP id 955AF1378A; Fri, 7 Nov 2003 22:39:37 +0100 (CET) Date: Fri, 7 Nov 2003 22:39:43 +0100 (CET) From: Gerald Pfeifer To: Erik Trulsson In-Reply-To: <20031104133722.GA30720@falcon.midgard.homeip.net> Message-ID: References: <20031104095501.3c7c5cfc.flynn@energyhq.es.eu.org> <20031104133722.GA30720@falcon.midgard.homeip.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII cc: ports@freebsd.org cc: Miguel Mendez Subject: Re: Does emulators/wine really need gcc 3.3? X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 07 Nov 2003 21:39:46 -0000 On Tue, 4 Nov 2003, Erik Trulsson wrote: >> Wanted to install wine yesterday and found that it's configured to >> depend on the gcc 3.3 port. However, commenting out that dependency also >> leads to a successful build with 5.1's compiler: > From the commit log for ports/emulators/wine/Makefile: > > revision 1.150 > date: 2003/10/17 15:37:35; author: gerald; state: Exp; lines: +4 -4 > Update to the 20031016 snapshot of Wine after we skipped the previous one > which was completely broken on FreeBSD. > Simplify post-build as I moved some part upstream and require GCC 3.3 as > GCC 2.95 suffers from all sorts of threading/libraries issues. (GCC 3.2 > also seems fine, but the ports collection requires us to request a concrete > version.) Thanks for pointing that out, Erik! It seems, I _do_ have some users of this port, after all. :-) I'll add a note on that to the Makefile. Miguel (et al), while GCC 3.2 probably will continue to work, my nightly builders and checks before committing an update to the port only exercise GCC 3.3 both on 4.8-STABLE and 5.1-CURRENT, so it's probably safer in the long run to use that. Gerald PS: If you got a mail bounces, this is because pooles.rima-tde.net has been listed as one of about eight spam-friendly/inactive providers on the mail server I'm using. -- Gerald Pfeifer (Jerry) gerald@pfeifer.com http://www.pfeifer.com/gerald/