Date: Thu, 3 Nov 2011 13:42:50 -0400 From: "b. f." <bf1783@googlemail.com> To: freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.org, freebsd-current@FreeBSD.org, Matthias Apitz <guru@unixarea.de> Subject: Re: 10.0-CUR r226986 && ports (general) Message-ID: <CAGFTUwN82LOFk_NW-E-%2BMuwL9ApsyAb_9y8KtDmhvaOZ6mbhKA@mail.gmail.com>
index | next in thread | raw e-mail
> > > It turns out that the problem is more general! A lot of ./configure > > > scripts are detecting in 10-CUR that they can't or should not build > > > shared libs; the problem is that the OS is detected now as > > > > As a temporary workaround, add "WITH_FBSD10_FIX=1" to /etc/make.conf. > > ports/UPDATING and some of the mails in the archive of -current > recommend setting UNAME_r=9.0-CURRENT; is this the same or which method > is prefered? No, it is not the same. You can either masquerade, by setting UNAME_r and OSVERSION, or by editing the headers and scripts that define them; or you can use WITH_FBSD10_FIX for ports that define HAS_CONFIGURE (which is implied by USE_AUTOTOOLS and GNU_CONFIGURE). Right now the masquerading is probably safer, because there are some problems with the fix that are still being resolved -- and a few ports that may fail despite the fix. But of course if you help to test without masquerading, these problems will be resolved sooner. b.home | help
Want to link to this message? Use this
URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CAGFTUwN82LOFk_NW-E-%2BMuwL9ApsyAb_9y8KtDmhvaOZ6mbhKA>