Date: Thu, 2 Feb 2012 08:38:38 +0000 From: Chris Rees <utisoft@gmail.com> To: Michael Scheidell <michael.scheidell@secnap.com> Cc: ports@freebsd.org, Mark Linimon <linimon@lonesome.com> Subject: Re: not for arch? use arch? don't care arch? Message-ID: <CADLo83-Xu6baHRejTuodABCTaTOJ_5x809iU23%2B2bnCSJ8=6TQ@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <4F2A494F.5000807@secnap.com> References: <4F296566.805@secnap.com> <20120202051921.GC6434@lonesome.com> <4F2A494F.5000807@secnap.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 2 Feb 2012 08:28, "Michael Scheidell" <michael.scheidell@secnap.com>
wrote:
>
> On 2/2/12 12:19 AM, Mark Linimon wrote:
>>
>> I'd say leave out the following stanza, and also leave out ONLY_FOR/
>> NOT_FOR_ARCHS:
>>
>>> > -.if ${ARCH} == "sparc64"
>>> > -BROKEN= Does not compile on sparc64
>>> > -.endif
>
> I don't have a sparc64 tb, and submitter doesn't either, and didn't test
it on sparc64.
>
> I commit the pr and if I get a pavmail, I'll just commit it back again.
(and if I need to commit it back again, what is preferred language?)
>
>
We don't build sparc packages, so no Pavmail.
Chris
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CADLo83-Xu6baHRejTuodABCTaTOJ_5x809iU23%2B2bnCSJ8=6TQ>