Date: Thu, 8 Mar 2012 04:59:09 +0000 From: "b. f." <bf1783@googlemail.com> To: freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.org, Mark Linimon <linimon@lonesome.com> Cc: Gautam <list@execve.net>, dinoex@freebsd.org Subject: Re: graphics/png does not build with lang/gcc Message-ID: <CAGFTUwN7DY79AzUJqjaUQFVbp0qGRZ_PeEfn45dFK=s6PjVciw@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <20120308034704.GD16364@lonesome.com> References: <CAGFTUwPUFdP=Z20%2BbL59qFuh_V6R1R-GcyrK03dxESL6ZyGz7A@mail.gmail.com> <20120308034704.GD16364@lonesome.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 3/8/12, Mark Linimon <linimon@lonesome.com> wrote: > On Wed, Mar 07, 2012 at 12:11:52PM +0000, b. f. wrote: >> The custom gcc article that you are attempting to use was written at >> a time when some of the related port Makefiles had some shortcomings >> that no longer exist, and is not the recommended way to use lang/gcc* >> for ports. > > Would you be interested in helping to update it? If you like, I can suggest a few changes. But I thought that it was primarily Martin's article, which he wrote when he was benchmarking perl with different toolchains. > >> For all but a handful of ports that lang/gcc* depends upon, or >> those that don't respect the toolchain-related variables, you can just >> install lang/gcc or lang/gcc46 and set USE_GCC=4.6 in your build >> environment, an included Makefile, or on the command line. > > Setting USE_* in e.g. /etc/make.conf is always incorrect, see: > > http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/porters-handbook/makefile-depend.html#USE-VARS > > You can wind up in the degenerate case maknig gcc46 depend upon itself. That is why I wrote: "... all but a handful of ports that lang/gcc* depends upon ...". The OP wanted to find a way to use lang/gcc* in a custom build of a port -- which, as you know from your own work, isn't well-supported in Ports right now. (We make an attempt to be flexible, and there is some infrastructure to do so, but many ports aren't tested with different toolchains. Some tinkering is inevitably involved if any substantial number of ports are built in this way.) The OP was willing to use invasive changes suggested by the custom gcc article. Therefore, I assumed that he wasn't interested in strictly adhering to our guidelines, and just wanted a pragmatic solution, which is what I offered to him. Setting USE_GCC in this case is safer and easier than what he was doing. I didn't intend to suggest that anyone make unqualified use of it in make.conf. There is already far too much abuse of that special file. b.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CAGFTUwN7DY79AzUJqjaUQFVbp0qGRZ_PeEfn45dFK=s6PjVciw>