From owner-svn-ports-head@freebsd.org Tue Nov 27 13:58:16 2018 Return-Path: Delivered-To: svn-ports-head@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6BC00114CEE5; Tue, 27 Nov 2018 13:58:16 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from jbeich@freebsd.org) Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (freefall.freebsd.org [96.47.72.132]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "freefall.freebsd.org", Issuer "Let's Encrypt Authority X3" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 116967BE30; Tue, 27 Nov 2018 13:58:16 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from jbeich@freebsd.org) Received: by freefall.freebsd.org (Postfix, from userid 1354) id F3250DBF4; Tue, 27 Nov 2018 13:58:15 +0000 (UTC) From: Jan Beich To: Antoine Brodin Cc: svn-ports-head@freebsd.org, svn-ports-all@freebsd.org, ports-committers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: svn commit: r486008 - head/lang/ghc References: <201811271341.wARDfReG041847@repo.freebsd.org> <1s76-6307-wny@FreeBSD.org> Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2018 14:58:12 +0100 In-Reply-To: <1s76-6307-wny@FreeBSD.org> (Jan Beich's message of "Tue, 27 Nov 2018 14:53:12 +0100") Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 116967BE30 X-Spamd-Result: default: False [1.77 / 15.00]; local_wl_from(0.00)[freebsd.org]; NEURAL_SPAM_SHORT(0.25)[0.252,0]; NEURAL_SPAM_MEDIUM(0.78)[0.783,0]; NEURAL_SPAM_LONG(0.74)[0.736,0]; ASN(0.00)[asn:11403, ipnet:96.47.64.0/20, country:US] X-Rspamd-Server: mx1.freebsd.org X-BeenThere: svn-ports-head@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: SVN commit messages for the ports tree for head List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2018 13:58:16 -0000 Jan Beich writes: > Antoine Brodin writes: > >> Author: antoine >> Date: Tue Nov 27 13:41:27 2018 >> New Revision: 486008 >> URL: https://svnweb.freebsd.org/changeset/ports/486008 >> >> Log: >> Fix build on head amd64 after ld.bfd is no longer installed >> >> With hat: portmgr > > Do we have a (meta) bug tracking ld.bfd removal? I would be surprised > if LLD_UNSAFE works as out of 149 ports only 4 define USE_BINUTILS. Nevermind, LLD_UNSAFE defines USE_BINUTILS if /usr/bin/ld.bfd doesn't exist.