Date: Thu, 11 May 2006 21:25:18 +0400 From: Boris Samorodov <bsam@ipt.ru> To: Frank Laszlo <laszlof@vonostingroup.com> Cc: ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: tomcat55 port on AMD64 Message-ID: <73088465@srv.sem.ipt.ru> In-Reply-To: <44636F83.8020103@vonostingroup.com> (Frank Laszlo's message of "Thu, 11 May 2006 13:08:19 -0400") References: <00bd01c6750a$b7c631e0$0a1610ac@prodcave.com> <4463603F.3050600@vonostingroup.com> <39169750@srv.sem.ipt.ru> <44636F83.8020103@vonostingroup.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, 11 May 2006 13:08:19 -0400 Frank Laszlo wrote: > Boris Samorodov wrote: > > On Thu, 11 May 2006 12:03:11 -0400 Frank Laszlo wrote: > > > >> I submitted a patch[1] to fix this issue some time ago, It has to do > >> with the way linux ports handle ARCH, since the linux emulation port > >> doesn't work on amd64, its forced to use i386 rpm's. Unfortunately my > >> efforts were shun by a brick wall, and no changes were made to address > >> this. I am going to repeat this one more time, ARCH should NEVER be > >> overwritten, here is yet another example of why. > > > >> [1]http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=ports/91911 > > > > Seems that this problem shouldn't exist since updating of the port to > > use new bsd.linux-rpm.mk. > > > You would think so, but the fact of the matter is, ARCH should be a > READONLY variable. It is relied upon heavily in the ports framework and > shouldn't be changed, ever. Why we don't just use another variable name > to do the trickery is what I am wondering. Argh, yes. You are right. It do have problems with current default port linux_base-8. I'm using linux_base-fc3 for a long time and get used to it too much. WBR -- Boris B. Samorodov, Research Engineer InPharmTech Co, http://www.ipt.ru Telephone & Internet Service Provider
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?73088465>