From owner-cvs-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Jan 31 10:03:59 2005 Return-Path: Delivered-To: cvs-ports@freebsd.org Received: by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix, from userid 1033) id 7576E16A4D0; Mon, 31 Jan 2005 10:03:59 +0000 (GMT) Date: Mon, 31 Jan 2005 10:03:59 +0000 From: Alexey Dokuchaev To: Pav Lucistnik Message-ID: <20050131100359.GA98611@FreeBSD.org> References: <200501292340.j0TNe7eq054403@repoman.freebsd.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=koi8-r Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200501292340.j0TNe7eq054403@repoman.freebsd.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.1i cc: cvs-ports@FreeBSD.org cc: cvs-all@FreeBSD.org cc: ports-committers@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: ports/lang/mozart Makefile X-BeenThere: cvs-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: CVS commit messages for the ports tree List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 31 Jan 2005 10:03:59 -0000 On Sat, Jan 29, 2005 at 11:40:07PM +0000, Pav Lucistnik wrote: > pav 2005-01-29 23:40:07 UTC > > FreeBSD ports repository > > Modified files: > lang/mozart Makefile > Log: > - Fix build on FreeBSD 5 > gcc 3.x makes new assumptions on private c++ data > gcc 2.95 compiles mozart with no problems Actually, I tend to avoid "fixes" like this (workarounds really). Since 2.95 is obviously going to be supported less and less in the future, and we're officially done with 4.X-RELEASEs, we should probably refrain from pulling in compiler that is older than what's in the base now. Forcing GCC to 2.95 should only be used in extreme cases, which cannot be solved by simple patching. For this very case, I don't want to test it and fix myself since this port want emacs and stuff, and I do not want to pollute my working system with this, but since submitter states that the problem with newer GCC is because it "makes new assumptions on private C++ data", I'd rather see a patch committed, or some reasoning why it cannot be. ./danfe