From owner-freebsd-ports-bugs@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Nov 3 22:30:17 2005 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-ports-bugs@hub.freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-ports-bugs@hub.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5F45A16A41F for ; Thu, 3 Nov 2005 22:30:17 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from gnats@FreeBSD.org) Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (freefall.freebsd.org [216.136.204.21]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0EC4043D45 for ; Thu, 3 Nov 2005 22:30:17 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from gnats@FreeBSD.org) Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (gnats@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.13.3/8.13.3) with ESMTP id jA3MUGT4009693 for ; Thu, 3 Nov 2005 22:30:16 GMT (envelope-from gnats@freefall.freebsd.org) Received: (from gnats@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.13.3/8.13.1/Submit) id jA3MUGZj009692; Thu, 3 Nov 2005 22:30:16 GMT (envelope-from gnats) Date: Thu, 3 Nov 2005 22:30:16 GMT Message-Id: <200511032230.jA3MUGZj009692@freefall.freebsd.org> To: freebsd-ports-bugs@FreeBSD.org From: Simun Mikecin Cc: Subject: Re: ports/87853: [fix] multimedia/mplayer: no bsdbt848 driver compiled in X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports-bugs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list Reply-To: Simun Mikecin List-Id: Ports bug reports List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 03 Nov 2005 22:30:17 -0000 The following reply was made to PR ports/87853; it has been noted by GNATS. From: Simun Mikecin To: bug-followup@FreeBSD.org Cc: Subject: Re: ports/87853: [fix] multimedia/mplayer: no bsdbt848 driver compiled in Date: Thu, 3 Nov 2005 14:27:14 -0800 (PST) --- "Thomas E. Zander" wrote: > Hi, > > I'm a bit confused....referring to your PR you were > running a 6.0-RC > when this problem occurred. > > On a RELENG_6 box as of today (yes, I have cleaned > up /usr/include > entirely) there are both > > /usr/include/machine/ioctl_bt848.h *and* > /usr/include/dev/bktr/ioctl_bt848.h > > in place. I did a bit more research on this, and actually we are both right. I have two RELENG_6 boxes. One is i386 that is actually an upgrade from RELENG_5. The other one is amd64 that is a clean RELENG_6 install. On an i386 box I have: /usr/include/dev/bktr/ioctl_bt848.h (9767 bytes) /usr/include/machine/ioctl_bt848.h (1675 bytes) And on an amd64 box I only have: /usr/include/dev/bktr/ioctl_bt848.h (9767 bytes) If you try to find ioctl_bt848.h in the /usr/src/ tree, you will find this: /usr/src/sys/alpha/include/ioctl_bt848.h (1675 bytes) /usr/src/sys/dev/bktr/ioctl_bt848.h (9767 bytes) /usr/src/sys/i386/include/ioctl_bt848.h (1675 bytes) /usr/src/sys/pc98/include/ioctl_bt848.h (165 bytes) So, my conclusion is: on the architectures that have their "machine" version of ioctl_bt848.h (and those are alpha, i386 and pc98), those "machine" version files get installed as /usr/include/machine/ioctl_bt848.h. But *ALL* architectures get /usr/include/dev/bktr/ioctl_bt848.h installed. So on an i386 you have both, on the amd64 you only get /usr/include/dev/bktr/ioctl_bt848.h. > > However the first header doesn't to much but adding > the second one. > Thus, for me it detects bt848, compiles fine and the > driver is > alright. Are your includes really okay? > > The xmms patch and the cdrom/dvdrom device names are > reinplaced in the > post-patch stage during port build. > > I'm sorry but I don't think this pr should be > committed. I probably made an error in the patch file. But by now you understand that only thing that is needed is to replace /usr/include/machine/ioctl_bsdbt848.h with /usr/include/dev/bktr/ioctl_bsdbt848.h in the configure script to make it work on *all* architectures. Your port in the current state is broken concerning the usage of the bsdbt848 driver on amd64 platform. Hope this changed your mind... __________________________________ Yahoo! Mail - PC Magazine Editors' Choice 2005 http://mail.yahoo.com