From owner-cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Mar 9 17:47:32 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: cvs-all@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E67001065673; Sun, 9 Mar 2008 17:47:32 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from gerald@pfeifer.com) Received: from vexpert.dbai.tuwien.ac.at (vexpert.dbai.tuwien.ac.at [128.131.111.2]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 95F638FC15; Sun, 9 Mar 2008 17:47:32 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from gerald@pfeifer.com) Received: from acrux.dbai.tuwien.ac.at (acrux [128.131.111.60]) by vexpert.dbai.tuwien.ac.at (Postfix) with ESMTP id DAF4739135; Sun, 9 Mar 2008 18:15:12 +0100 (CET) Received: by acrux.dbai.tuwien.ac.at (Postfix, from userid 1203) id E622D1004E; Sun, 9 Mar 2008 18:15:13 +0100 (CET) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by acrux.dbai.tuwien.ac.at (Postfix) with ESMTP id D357C10043; Sun, 9 Mar 2008 18:15:13 +0100 (CET) Date: Sun, 9 Mar 2008 18:15:13 +0100 (CET) From: Gerald Pfeifer To: ports-committers@freebsd.org, cvs-ports@freebsd.org, cvs-all@freebsd.org In-Reply-To: <20080226194039.GA52046@alchemy.franken.de> Message-ID: References: <200802010653.m116rLi7074141@repoman.freebsd.org> <20080226194039.GA52046@alchemy.franken.de> User-Agent: Alpine 1.00 (LSU 955 2008-03-06) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Cc: Mark Linimon , Marius Strobl Subject: Re: cvs commit: ports/devel/gdb53 Makefile X-BeenThere: cvs-all@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: CVS commit messages for the entire tree List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 09 Mar 2008 17:47:33 -0000 On Tue, 26 Feb 2008, Marius Strobl wrote: >> Modified files: >> devel/gdb53 Makefile >> Log: >> Mark broken on sparc64-7: install fails with "Unknown Architecture". > FYI, this and possibly some other gcc34 consumers were fixed > in gcc-3.4.6_3,1. Though (after having discussed this with Marius) I do need to point out that the respective maintainers really should fix their ports, ideally upstream. Any use of USE_GCC=X.Y instead of USE_GCC=X.Y+ is a bug in GCC or in the respective port, and nearly always the latter. Gerald