From owner-svn-ports-head@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Nov 4 20:53:50 2013 Return-Path: Delivered-To: svn-ports-head@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 70418B8B; Mon, 4 Nov 2013 20:53:50 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from stefan@freebsd.org) Received: from mail.hamcom.de (mail.hamcom.de [212.37.37.214]) (using TLSv1.1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 278FB2231; Mon, 4 Nov 2013 20:53:50 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [88.208.170.199] (port=16775 helo=birne.dunkelkammer.void) by mail.hamcom.de with esmtpa (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1VdQjR-0001e2-OP; Mon, 04 Nov 2013 21:26:42 +0100 Received: by birne.dunkelkammer.void (Postfix, from userid 1002) id 231F511706; Mon, 4 Nov 2013 21:26:41 +0100 (CET) X-HeLi-id: cfcd208495d565ef66e7dff9f98764da Date: Mon, 4 Nov 2013 21:26:41 +0100 From: Stefan Walter To: Gerald Pfeifer Subject: Re: svn commit: r332623 - head/mail/spamprobe Message-ID: <20131104202640.GA1237@birne.dunkelkammer.void> References: <201311031621.rA3GLHqh042299@svn.freebsd.org> <20131103163804.GA1242@birne.dunkelkammer.void> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.22 (2013-10-16) X-Spam-Score: -1.0 X-Spam-Flag: NO Cc: svn-ports-head@freebsd.org, svn-ports-all@freebsd.org, Andrej Zverev , ports-committers@freebsd.org X-BeenThere: svn-ports-head@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: SVN commit messages for the ports tree for head List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 04 Nov 2013 20:53:50 -0000 Gerald Pfeifer, 03.11.13, 20:35h CET: > On Sun, 3 Nov 2013, Stefan Walter wrote: > > Andrej Zverev, 03.11.13, 17:27h CET: > >> Why not such way? > >> > >> +.if ${OSVERSION} >= 1000024 > >> +USE_GCC= yes > >> +.endif > > Because that does not compile, either: > > https://redports.org/~stefan/20131103163400-45978-156961/spamprobe-1.4d_7.log > > Looks like > > #include > > or > > #include > > might improve this applied at the right spot? > > Gerald Yep...here and there. Looks like I eventually found all the spots where #includes were missing. According to redports, it now works on 10. Best regards, Stefan