From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Oct 29 12:00:55 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B0FB51065674 for ; Wed, 29 Oct 2008 12:00:55 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from mail@ozzmosis.com) Received: from smtp.mel.people.net.au (smtp.mel.people.net.au [218.214.17.98]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with SMTP id E85938FC14 for ; Wed, 29 Oct 2008 12:00:54 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from mail@ozzmosis.com) Received: (qmail 5752 invoked from network); 29 Oct 2008 12:00:52 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO blizzard.dnsalias.org) (218.215.166.240) by smtp.mel.people.net.au with SMTP; 29 Oct 2008 12:00:52 -0000 Received: by blizzard.dnsalias.org (Postfix, from userid 1001) id E628417075; Wed, 29 Oct 2008 23:00:50 +1100 (EST) Date: Wed, 29 Oct 2008 23:00:50 +1100 From: andrew clarke To: Scot Hetzel Message-ID: <20081029120050.GA77220@ozzmosis.com> References: <790a9fff0810290242m58012ac5r10bb761f65c97a1c@mail.gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <790a9fff0810290242m58012ac5r10bb761f65c97a1c@mail.gmail.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) Cc: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: ports missing their packages. 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: Wed, 29 Oct 2008 12:00:55 -0000 On Wed 2008-10-29 04:42:18 UTC-0500, Scot Hetzel (swhetzel@gmail.com) wrote: > So you are advocating that port maintainers have to create packages > for all the supported FreeBSD architecture's (amd64, arm, i386, ia64, > mips, pc98, powerpc, sparc64, sun4v). That would be 9 packages > needing to be created at the time the port maintainer submits the > upgrade PR. Or more if you want packages for both FreeBSD 6.x & 7.x. Presumably the 6.x series wlll be retired before 8.x is released... :) That brings up a question (not directed at you, Scot) - what is the usual procedure for port maintainers so they can test their ports on both 6.x & 7.x? In terms of building a port, is it a case of most porters running 7.x, and what compiles with gcc 4.2 without trouble is likely to be OK with gcc 3.4 also? I suppose you could install lang/gcc34 under 7.x and try building your port with that instead of the base gcc. Then it's just a matter of setting CC=gcc34. Or is there more to it than that?