From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Dec 12 18:31:27 2011 Return-Path: Delivered-To: ports@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 809B9106566B; Mon, 12 Dec 2011 18:31:27 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from sunpoet@sunpoet.net) Received: from sunpoet.net (sunpoet.net [220.133.12.240]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4A1258FC18; Mon, 12 Dec 2011 18:31:27 +0000 (UTC) Received: by sunpoet.net (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 52CE63B5B; Tue, 13 Dec 2011 02:11:53 +0800 (CST) Date: Tue, 13 Dec 2011 02:11:53 +0800 From: Sunpoet Po-Chuan Hsieh To: Kevin Oberman Message-ID: <20111212181153.GB76159@bonjour.sunpoet.net> References: <20111212173616.GA85305@DataIX.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Organization: The FreeBSD Project User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Cc: ports@freebsd.org, gerald@freebsd.org Subject: Re: lang/gcc46 X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 12 Dec 2011 18:31:27 -0000 On Mon, Dec 12, 2011 at 10:03:14AM -0800, Kevin Oberman wrote: > On Mon, Dec 12, 2011 at 9:36 AM, Jason Hellenthal wrote: > > > > Hi Gerald, > > > > As a request once again similiar to one I have made in the past... Would it be possible yet to slow down the update process for the gcc46 port ? > > > > This is turning out to be quite the pain in the U-Know-What with version flapping and rebuilding because a port depends on it. If I am correct it is updated weekly. I caught the tail end of the previous update and the day after it was bumped to the next snapshot version & by the time both of those were finished the port had once again been bumped to _1. > > > > Is there anything that could be done to stabalize this ... ? > > > > At this point I am left for the manual intervention of using +IGNOREME files or excluding by whatever means neccesary as weekly updates seem completely unneccesary now that alot of ports are shifting to depend on gcc46. > > > > Can a gcc46-devel port be branched for those that absolutely need the weekly updates ? > +1 > > gcc46 is used by so many ports that I am continually re-building it > and on slow machines, this takes a while. How about a gcc46-devel port > that gets the regular updates and let gcc46 stay stable when there are > not major fixes? We have lang/gcc already. This port is created for perferred gcc releases (4.6.2 currently). What we're waiting for is a bsd.gcc.mk update to allow users build ports with lang/gcc instead of lang/gcc46.