Date: Sat, 11 Apr 2009 21:44:10 +0400 From: Stanislav Sedov <stas@FreeBSD.org> To: Norikatsu Shigemura <nork@FreeBSD.org> Cc: svn-src-head@FreeBSD.org, vd@FreeBSD.org, David Schultz <das@FreeBSD.org>, src-committers@FreeBSD.org, svn-src-all@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: svn commit: r190943 - head/include Message-ID: <20090411214410.c53d0fb1.stas@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <20090412021841.673a200b.nork@FreeBSD.org> References: <200904111657.n3BGvpsC092703@svn.freebsd.org> <20090411210702.ce5325b9.stas@FreeBSD.org> <20090412021841.673a200b.nork@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Sun, 12 Apr 2009 02:18:41 +0900 Norikatsu Shigemura <nork@FreeBSD.org> mentioned: > On Sat, 11 Apr 2009 21:07:02 +0400 > Stanislav Sedov <stas@freebsd.org> wrote: > > > Log: > > > GNU Pth has some fragile kludges that were broken by r189828. > > > I've discussed this with the Pth maintainer and no clear solution > > > has emerged on the ports side of things, so for now, hack around > > > the issue in signal.h. > > Can't we just put a patch in ports tree itself? What meant under 'no > > clean solution emerged'? I can prepare a patch, if needed. > > I think so, too. I have a quick hack patch. > > ports/devel/pth/files/patch-pth_p.h.in > - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - > --- pth_p.h.in.orig 2006-06-09 02:54:03.000000000 +0900 > +++ pth_p.h.in 2009-04-08 15:05:12.911807009 +0900 > @@ -32,7 +32,7 @@ > #include <stdarg.h> > #include <string.h> > #include <setjmp.h> > -#include <signal.h> > +//#include <signal.h> > #include <unistd.h> > #include <fcntl.h> > #include <errno.h> > > - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - > Or just drop the line. Vasil, what do you think about the possibility to commit this patch into the tree? I think we should have a workaround in ports tree (it is one of the things what it was designed for) than in the src tree. Better would be to implement a workaround upstream, though. I think something like #if !(defined(__FreeBSD__) && __FreeBSD_version >= %%PTHREAD_CHANGE_VERSION%%) #include <signal.h> #endif where %%PTHREAD_CHANGE_VERSION%% would correspond to the __FreeBSD_version where the change was introduced, could be safely submitted upstream. - -- Stanislav Sedov ST4096-RIPE -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iEYEARECAAYFAkng1uoACgkQK/VZk+smlYErSwCfbHR20spUIzAvATR9wvWvco5B RBkAn0Ailghm/yDk2kjImZLVnGXqiGAc =KTfP -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- !DSPAM:49e0d6e5967001966218968!
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20090411214410.c53d0fb1.stas>