Date: Fri, 13 Jul 2012 15:46:09 -0700 From: Kevin Oberman <kob6558@gmail.com> To: Jung-uk Kim <jkim@freebsd.org> Cc: Warren Block <wblock@wonkity.com>, Baptiste Daroussin <bapt@freebsd.org>, Dimitry Andric <dim@freebsd.org>, Olivier Smedts <olivier@gid0.org>, freebsd-ports@freebsd.org, Leslie Jensen <leslie@eskk.nu>, Peter Jeremy <peter@rulingia.com> Subject: Re: make failed for editors/libreoffice Message-ID: <CAN6yY1t5ZeCXjFDJVCg-6xC_EKjbmk=Vg%2Bqnd5_cb7UyYCFG-w@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <5000A3B9.4070703@FreeBSD.org> References: <4FF15A89.3000204@eskk.nu> <4FF2E349.5000202@FreeBSD.org> <20120704191351.GB70705@server.rulingia.com> <4FF49F51.8070600@FreeBSD.org> <4FFBD734.5030909@FreeBSD.org> <4FFFE2B7.7040303@FreeBSD.org> <CABzXLYMqH4Oo7PbYNhusOOTTcrHuB%2Bb5Z=Z8Kgs08hf1K_MV-Q@mail.gmail.com> <20120713102704.GF49382@ithaqua.etoilebsd.net> <alpine.BSF.2.00.1207130432340.52617@wonkity.com> <500081F7.800@FreeBSD.org> <50009C24.3060104@FreeBSD.org> <5000A3B9.4070703@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Fri, Jul 13, 2012 at 3:39 PM, Jung-uk Kim <jkim@freebsd.org> wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On 2012-07-13 18:07:32 -0400, Dimitry Andric wrote:
>> On 2012-07-13 22:15, Jung-uk Kim wrote: ...
>>> It is mmap'ing an empty file and that's the root cause. Try
>>> move ${LOCALBASE}/lib/libreoffice/program/addin/.keep away and
>>> try again, e.g.,
>>>
>>> mv ${LOCALBASE}/lib/libreoffice/program/addin/.keep /tmp
>>>
>>> At least, it worked for me. :-)
>>
>> FWIW, I've finally managed to free up some disk space and time to
>> build the whole thing, and it seems to work for me. Calc runs too,
>> after getting rid of the .keep file!
>>
>> So in r238429 I have now committed the fix for clang. I will
>> attempt to get this merged into stable/9 before release.
>
> I saw that, thanks!
>
>> Is there anything I can do to make it easier for the port to detect
>> that clang is fixed? I'm not sure bumping __FreeBSD_version just
>> for something like this is worth it...
>
> No, I don't think it is worth the trouble. If we really need it, we
> can use 1000015 for head as it was bumped yesterday. Then, when we
> enter release cycle and 9.1 is branched, we may use 901000.
>
> Jung-uk Kim
Sounds fine as long as both changes are documented. I am sure that you
would, but it is easy to overlook when two changes are tied to one
OSVERSION. (Not that my opinion is too significant as I don't commit
anything, but I do deal with the fallout.)
--
R. Kevin Oberman, Network Engineer
E-mail: kob6558@gmail.com
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CAN6yY1t5ZeCXjFDJVCg-6xC_EKjbmk=Vg%2Bqnd5_cb7UyYCFG-w>