From owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Dec 7 22:36:16 2011 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0961F1065670 for ; Wed, 7 Dec 2011 22:36:16 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from freebsd-hackers@herveybayaustralia.com.au) Received: from mail.unitedinsong.com.au (mail.unitedinsong.com.au [150.101.178.33]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id ABBA98FC17 for ; Wed, 7 Dec 2011 22:36:15 +0000 (UTC) Received: from laptop1.herveybayaustralia.com.au (laptop1.herveybayaustralia.com.au [192.168.0.179]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-CAMELLIA256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.unitedinsong.com.au (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 267475C27 for ; Thu, 8 Dec 2011 08:48:37 +1000 (EST) Message-ID: <4EDFE9BD.9020105@herveybayaustralia.com.au> Date: Thu, 08 Dec 2011 08:33:33 +1000 From: Da Rock User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; FreeBSD amd64; rv:7.0.1) Gecko/20111109 Thunderbird/7.0.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org References: <4EDEB600.9000102@herveybayaustralia.com.au> <4EDF4703.1050705@herveybayaustralia.com.au> <4EDF5253.5060201@herveybayaustralia.com.au> <20111207114756.48295690@mikmeyer-vm-fedora> <4EDFE933.3060708@herveybayaustralia.com.au> In-Reply-To: <4EDFE933.3060708@herveybayaustralia.com.au> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: 64bit build errors X-BeenThere: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Technical Discussions relating to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 07 Dec 2011 22:36:16 -0000 On 12/08/11 08:31, Da Rock wrote: > On 12/08/11 05:47, Mike Meyer wrote: >> On Wed, 7 Dec 2011 12:17:57 +0000 >> Tom Evans wrote: >>> The way I understand it is that they use compiler/assembler features >>> that did not exist in the version of binutils that is in base. >> Which begs the question - why isn't the new version of the tools >> (provided by ports) listed in BUILDDEPENDS in the port, then? >> > I'm not building the port. This is my own build, so the builddepends > isn't existent. Hence hackers@, else I would have posted ports@