From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Jan 13 03:29:35 2005 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 84E2F16A4CE; Thu, 13 Jan 2005 03:29:35 +0000 (GMT) Received: from dragon.nuxi.com (trang.nuxi.com [66.93.134.19]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 551C843D2D; Thu, 13 Jan 2005 03:29:35 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from obrien@NUXI.com) Received: from dragon.nuxi.com (obrien@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dragon.nuxi.com (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id j0D3TTlx037250; Wed, 12 Jan 2005 19:29:29 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from obrien@dragon.nuxi.com) Received: (from obrien@localhost) by dragon.nuxi.com (8.13.1/8.13.1/Submit) id j0D3TOp9037247; Wed, 12 Jan 2005 19:29:24 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from obrien) Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2005 19:29:24 -0800 From: "David O'Brien" To: rittle@labs.mot.com Message-ID: <20050113032924.GB36950@dragon.nuxi.com> References: <200501081657.j08GvnML053109@sakura.ninth-nine.com> <200501122031.j0CKVxjP084836@latour.waar.labs.mot.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200501122031.j0CKVxjP084836@latour.waar.labs.mot.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i X-Operating-System: FreeBSD 6.0-CURRENT Organization: The NUXI BSD Group X-Pgp-Rsa-Fingerprint: B7 4D 3E E9 11 39 5F A3 90 76 5D 69 58 D9 98 7A X-Pgp-Rsa-Keyid: 1024/34F9F9D5 cc: ports@FreeBSD.org cc: gerald@pfeifer.com cc: nork@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: Fix -pthread issue on lang/gcc3[34] X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list Reply-To: obrien@FreeBSD.org List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2005 03:29:35 -0000 On Wed, Jan 12, 2005 at 02:31:59PM -0600, Loren James Rittle wrote: > In article , > Gerald Pfeifer writes: > > [...] > > David, Loren, how shall we proceed? I believe David raised issues wrt. > > cross-compilation which would render the #ifdefs unsuitable for upstream. > > Would a configure option, which is then used by the FreeBSD ports, be an > > option? > > >> Index: gcc33/Makefile > >> Index: gcc34/Makefile > [...] > > David already patched both mainline and 3.4 branch on FSF. > > Thus, I think it is OK to have an equivalent port patch at least until > you start to use an FSF release with the patch. I didn't check > closely to see if this proposed port patch was exactly what David > installed on the FSF tree. What is in the FSF tree is the best we can do given the existing framework and cross-build requirements. The FreeBSD Ports Collection does not support cross-builds (either arch or OS); so I am able to commit something more exact there. -- -- David (obrien@FreeBSD.org)