Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Tue, 10 Apr 2012 05:08:35 -0400
From:      Michael Scheidell <scheidell@FreeBSD.org>
To:        <ports@freebsd.org>
Subject:   .if ARCH / BROKEN, or 'NOT_FOR_ARCH'?
Message-ID:  <4F83F893.7040500@FreeBSD.org>

next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
I believe there was a discussion a while back, and if you used this:

.if ${ARCH} == "sparc64"
  BROKEN=             does not compile on sparc64: assertion failed
.endif

it is POSSIBLE that cluster runs that test broken ports could fix them (accidentally), but, wasn't the opinion that you might as well use '
NOT_FOR_ARCH(s)?  '


-- 
Michael Scheidell, CTO
 >*| * SECNAP Network Security Corporation
d: +1.561.948.2259
w: http://people.freebsd.org/~scheidell



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4F83F893.7040500>