From owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Oct 25 21:58:53 2011 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CFF2A1065673; Tue, 25 Oct 2011 21:58:53 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from marka@isc.org) Received: from mx.pao1.isc.org (mx.pao1.isc.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:0:2::2b]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AEDAA8FC12; Tue, 25 Oct 2011 21:58:53 +0000 (UTC) Received: from bikeshed.isc.org (bikeshed.isc.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:3:d::19]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-CAMELLIA256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "bikeshed.isc.org", Issuer "ISC CA" (verified OK)) by mx.pao1.isc.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 85602C944A; Tue, 25 Oct 2011 21:58:40 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from marka@isc.org) Received: from drugs.dv.isc.org (unknown [IPv6:2001:470:1f00:820:6233:4bff:fe01:7585]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by bikeshed.isc.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id D22ED216C6A; Tue, 25 Oct 2011 21:58:39 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from marka@isc.org) Received: from drugs.dv.isc.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by drugs.dv.isc.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B6AA615DE789; Wed, 26 Oct 2011 08:58:37 +1100 (EST) To: obrien@freebsd.org, Hans Petter Selasky , freebsd-arch@freebsd.org, Adrian Chadd From: Mark Andrews References: <20111024230623.GB14274@dragon.NUXI.org> <201110250918.28709.hselasky@c2i.net> <20111025184523.GC47524@dragon.NUXI.org> Mail-Followup-To: obrien@freebsd.org, Hans Petter Selasky , freebsd-arch@freebsd.org, Adrian Chadd In-reply-to: Your message of "Tue, 25 Oct 2011 11:45:23 PDT." <20111025184523.GC47524@dragon.NUXI.org> Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2011 08:58:37 +1100 Message-Id: <20111025215837.B6AA615DE789@drugs.dv.isc.org> X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD autolearn=ham version=3.3.1 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on mx.pao1.isc.org Cc: Subject: Re: FreeBSD-10 -> FreeBSD-9.9 ? X-BeenThere: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion related to FreeBSD architecture List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2011 21:58:53 -0000 In message <20111025184523.GC47524@dragon.NUXI.org>, "David O'Brien" writes: > On Tue, Oct 25, 2011 at 09:18:28AM +0200, Hans Petter Selasky wrote: > > On Tuesday 25 October 2011 01:06:23 David O'Brien wrote: > > > On Mon, Oct 10, 2011 at 11:04:13AM +0800, Adrian Chadd wrote: > > > > Just an idle comment - why don't we just rename FreeBSD-10 to > > > > FreeBSD-9.9 for now, and give the ports/developers some time to "fix" > > > > bad autoconf/automake scripts? > > > > That way -current can still be used for testing/development. > > > > > > I figured someone else would respond by now... > > > > > > \aol{me too!} > > > > > > (though I suggest 9.99 as a value we'd never hit) > > > > > > I've made this change on all my local systems. > > > > Why not use 9.5.x ? > > Whould give more number space to increment? > > Eh? Sorry I don't follow -- why do we need to increment? > > "9.99" is a temperary work around to buy us just a few months time to fix > ports. Such a band-aid should not exist long enough to need to increment > anything. > > We mostly just need to not fall into things like: > > case $host_os in > [...] > freebsd1*) > ld_shlibs=no > ;; > [...] > > in 'configure'. Ok, so what's the minimum versions of the auto* and libtoo* that are fixed so I can ship BIND9 w/o freebsd1*) in configure? If I need to bump the tool versions I want to do it once. Mark -- Mark Andrews, ISC 1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742 INTERNET: marka@isc.org