Date: Wed, 24 Nov 1999 14:10:04 -0800 (PST) From: "Erik" <erikk@infowest.com> To: freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: ports/15029: XFree86 3.3.5 port is labeled as broken and so fails to build at all Message-ID: <199911242210.OAA28816@freefall.freebsd.org>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
The following reply was made to PR ports/15029; it has been noted by GNATS. From: "Erik" <erikk@infowest.com> To: Bill@infowest.com, Fumerol@infowest.com Cc: Subject: Re: ports/15029: XFree86 3.3.5 port is labeled as broken and so fails to build at all Date: Wed, 24 Nov 1999 14:53:05 -0700 (MST) Bill Fumerol <billf@chc-chimes.com> said: >On Sun, 21 Nov 1999 erikk@infowest.com wrote: > >> I just barely installed 3.3-STABLE from the November 19th snapshot then yesterday (20th) CVSup'd STABLE and PORTS and succeeded in building world. I did not install X since I decided to build it from the port. When attempting to build from the /usr/ports/x11/XFree86/ directory, the port is labeled as BROKEN in the Makefile. How can I install X as a port if the port is broken? Is there a fix coming? Any ideas how soon? >> >How-To-Repeat: > Try installing X cleanly from the ports collection (as of Nov. 20th 1999) on any 3.3-STABLE box and it will fail because the Makefile says the port is broken. > >Thank you for this insight into the ports system. If the port is marked >broken, one would assume there is a reason behind it. > >The port will have to be fixed to not think cpp is at /lib/cpp, fixed >to use -lcrypt appropriatly, fixed to actually _build_ X servers, fixed > to not try and use its own getenv() and a couple of other things first. > >Patches accepted. > >-- >- bill fumerola - billf@chc-chimes.com - BF1560 - computer horizons corp - >- ph:(800) 252-2421 - bfumerol@computerhorizons.com - billf@FreeBSD.org - I understand there is a reason. I'm just a bit puzzled by it. I commented out the BROKEN line from the Makefile and it built cleanly and installed my preferred X server just fine and seems to work okay. I assume there are some services that are affected by the getenv() problem and/or the -lcrypt problem but I must not be using them (I then built the KDE port and its working great on top of the "broken" X port). So what's up? Why cannot it NOT be labeled as broken in the meantime since it seems to work just fine for basic X workstation stuff? Is there a mechanism for ports that would permit something like "WARNING: There are several problems with this port that have not yet been addressed including 1) <insert problem> 2) .... N) Do you wish to ATTEMPT to build this port ANYWAY? (y/N):" and let me as the port user decide if I'd like to chance it? Wondering, ERIK To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-ports" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199911242210.OAA28816>