From owner-svn-ports-all@freebsd.org Mon Aug 24 19:48:11 2020 Return-Path: Delivered-To: svn-ports-all@mailman.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8A7543CBA82; Mon, 24 Aug 2020 19:48:11 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from pi@freebsd.org) Received: from fc.opsec.eu (fc.opsec.eu [IPv6:2001:14f8:200:4::4]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4Bb2jR1YY0z489F; Mon, 24 Aug 2020 19:48:11 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from pi@freebsd.org) Received: from pi by fc.opsec.eu with local (Exim 4.94 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1kAIRp-0001KV-Lv; Mon, 24 Aug 2020 21:48:05 +0200 Date: Mon, 24 Aug 2020 21:48:05 +0200 From: Kurt Jaeger To: Gerald Pfeifer Cc: Kurt Jaeger , Talal Al Dik , euan@potensol.com, ports-committers@freebsd.org, svn-ports-all@freebsd.org, svn-ports-head@freebsd.org Subject: Re: svn commit: r538829 - in head/net/opensips: . files Message-ID: <20200824194805.GN1265@fc.opsec.eu> References: <202006142038.05EKc4fq030670@repo.freebsd.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 4Bb2jR1YY0z489F X-Spamd-Bar: / Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org; none X-Spamd-Result: default: False [0.00 / 15.00]; local_wl_from(0.00)[freebsd.org]; ASN(0.00)[asn:12502, ipnet:2001:14f8::/32, country:DE] X-BeenThere: svn-ports-all@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.33 Precedence: list List-Id: SVN commit messages for the ports tree List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 24 Aug 2020 19:48:11 -0000 Hi! > On Sun, 14 Jun 2020, Kurt Jaeger wrote: > > URL: https://svnweb.freebsd.org/changeset/ports/538829 > > > > Log: > > net/opensips: update 2.2.6 -> 3.0.2 > > > > - a progress of almost 2.5 years of opensips development > > Hmm... > > > +USE_GCC= yes > > ...still requiring GCC is not ideal, though ;-) Have you tried building > this with clang? Yes. USE_GCC was the way at that time. I'm beginning to understand that this might be this '-fcommon' issue, at least in parts of the codebase. > I wouldn't be surprised for this to be or become an > issue with newer versions of GCC, too, then. Well, there a bit of time to investigate more... -- pi@FreeBSD.org +49 171 3101372 Now what ?