From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG  Tue Jun 11 11:22:04 2013
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: ports@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org
 [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1])
 by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 86BCD408;
 Tue, 11 Jun 2013 11:22:04 +0000 (UTC)
 (envelope-from FreeBSD@shaneware.biz)
Received: from ipmail04.adl6.internode.on.net (ipmail04.adl6.internode.on.net
 [IPv6:2001:44b8:8060:ff02:300:1:6:4])
 by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EBAD61CCB;
 Tue, 11 Jun 2013 11:22:03 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from ppp247-71.static.internode.on.net (HELO leader.local)
 ([203.122.247.71])
 by ipmail04.adl6.internode.on.net with ESMTP; 11 Jun 2013 20:52:00 +0930
Message-ID: <51B70857.1090505@ShaneWare.Biz>
Date: Tue, 11 Jun 2013 20:51:59 +0930
From: Shane Ambler <FreeBSD@ShaneWare.Biz>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; FreeBSD amd64;
 rv:17.0) Gecko/20130516 Thunderbird/17.0.6
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Martin Wilke <miwi@FreeBSD.org>
Subject: Re: [CFH] FreeBSD 10 and ports
References: <249D4A03-A62A-4033-9757-AF308D4422FF@FreeBSD.org>
In-Reply-To: <249D4A03-A62A-4033-9757-AF308D4422FF@FreeBSD.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: "ports@freebsd.org Ports" <ports@FreeBSD.org>
X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14
Precedence: list
List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD <freebsd-ports.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/options/freebsd-ports>,
 <mailto:freebsd-ports-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-ports>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-ports@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-ports-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports>,
 <mailto:freebsd-ports-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 11 Jun 2013 11:22:04 -0000

On 11/06/2013 16:20, Martin Wilke wrote:

> As we all know FreeBSD 10 brings a new compiler along, and for that
> we need to get ports on the right track. I have done several exp-runs
> on the current src and we still have a lot of fallouts. We would like
> to ask you to have a look [1] at the failed ports and help to fix
> them. We will start this week an i386 exp-run to see how the status
> is.

For those of us running 9.1 what is the best way to test?
I previously had little luck compiling in a 10-current tinderbox.

I see that one of my ports is failing with 10 and clang 3.3. I know it 
compiles with clang 3.1 on 9.1. Is using 3.4 from clang-devel a useful 
test compiler?