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>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> > > 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.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CAGFTUwN82LOFk_NW-E-%2BMuwL9ApsyAb_9y8KtDmhvaOZ6mbhKA>