Date: Sat, 13 Jan 2018 00:23:42 +0000 From: bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org To: freebsd-x11@FreeBSD.org Subject: [Bug 201623] /usr/ports/graphics/dri fails on powerpc Message-ID: <bug-201623-8047-oKbldNAimH@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/> In-Reply-To: <bug-201623-8047@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/> References: <bug-201623-8047@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D201623 --- Comment #8 from Mark Millard <markmi@dsl-only.net> --- (In reply to Niclas Zeising from comment #7) Some ports allow picking compilers/toolchains that are used in building the port. Others only work with a specific family. Yet others with only specific vintages/versions. What are the constraints on the graphics/mesa-dri compiler/toolchain usage? Can something like lang/gcc6 be used by graphics/mesa-dri ? (Might also require devel/binutils instead of the system toolchain.) If yes, then switching the port to use such a lang/gcc* (and devel/binutils ) might avoid any issues with the previously default compiler, whatever it was. (Presumes someone then uses a powerpc host to test the alternate compiler and toolchain.) If no, then can graphics/mesa-dri be modified to allow alternative compilers/toolchains=20 from ports to be tried by those with an appropriate context for targeting powerpc? [My normal powerpc64 and powerpc context is not a great test case because buildworld was using the problematical clang that messes up handling thrown C++ exceptions in the libraries that clang builds. I report problems that I find, which is why I do the experiments.] --=20 You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug.=
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?bug-201623-8047-oKbldNAimH>