Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2021 23:06:23 +0000 From: bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org To: ports-bugs@FreeBSD.org Subject: [Bug 251117] [NEW PORT] www/palemoon: Open-source web browser Message-ID: <bug-251117-7788-AaIE593eKW@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/> In-Reply-To: <bug-251117-7788@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/> References: <bug-251117-7788@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D251117 --- Comment #62 from Olivier Certner <olivier.freebsd@free.fr> --- Hi Kubilay, Thanks for popping in. To first answer your questions: 1. The latest patch for 29.4.2.1 is indeed upstream's latest version. 2. QA: Makefile linted long ago, I've re-run portlint and I'll make a few m= inor fixes to the Makefile. As for builds, there have not been recent poudriere builds on FreeBSD infrastructure that I know of. Is it possible to request some? About tier-1 architectures, aarch64 is not supported. The port builds on am= d64 and i386, but for the latter I don't think it is possible to build on a real i386 machine, an amd64 box with 32-bit libs is probably necessary (linking should take more than 4GB per ld process). Recently, I've only built on 12-STABLE myself. Very recent reports by users above indicate some failure on CURRENT, which is likely to manifest itself = on 13-STABLE as well (after the last LLVM/clang update this summer). I have ve= ry little time currently, I plan to build on 13-STABLE myself soon, but if som= eone wants to help, he's welcome. 3. GCC is a mandatory requirement, because this is only what upstream suppo= rts and the only thing that currently works. Also, we'll lose official branding= if we don't use it. At start, I tried to get Palemoon working with LLVM/clang++, but the produc= ed binaries simply crashed, and light investigations did not reveal anything obvious. I don't precisely remember now, and I don't know the actual amount= of work it would take. Anyway, I simply don't have the time currently and it's= a priori unlikely that upstream will accept the eventual patches to build with LLVM/clang (when I brought the subject on the table months ago, I was very strongly told not to do it). As for bundled libs, I explained several times above why we cannot get away with ports dependencies (API changes notably). This is a hard requirement (I don't want/can't maintain a fork). There is also the licensing concern (long discussion above in this PR, in particular with bapt@). We can set RESTRICTED to solve it for now. In a discussion with upstream during summer, they stated they wanted most FreeBSD changes integrated into their codebase and build system, or they'll lose interest, and possibly remove all BSD-related compatibility code. So t= he long term fate of this port is mostly dependent on this process, which I probably won't start before end of this year. So, pushing a port before that appears to me as premature. --=20 You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug.=
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?bug-251117-7788-AaIE593eKW>