From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG  Thu Nov  3 17:42:51 2011
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EEA38106566B
	for <freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.org>; Thu,  3 Nov 2011 17:42:51 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from bf1783@googlemail.com)
Received: from mail-wy0-f182.google.com (mail-wy0-f182.google.com
	[74.125.82.182])
	by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 855218FC13
	for <freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.org>; Thu,  3 Nov 2011 17:42:50 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by wyg36 with SMTP id 36so2037592wyg.13
	for <multiple recipients>; Thu, 03 Nov 2011 10:42:50 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
	d=googlemail.com; s=gamma;
	h=mime-version:reply-to:date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type;
	bh=92E3TWfgZawLeAio4VJtTicljPvX7+7vHofrhjP41R8=;
	b=x0aa2M1M8oftpB6yR1FkqczGcpd/5dZd4E2acXHXKppEW8yJfVSh0IZx7cPVuiBKQh
	lTkIp+IFSiDljg0pAwLbMQhHp0ctyesYgf7Ml8G3BpHRxmepke0B1ROqhhB2Rc/DBzUb
	ET+ydRua+322fd0OnIfN/OTGfSjxbv/yPmTjU=
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.227.206.147 with SMTP id fu19mr13360004wbb.22.1320342170073;
	Thu, 03 Nov 2011 10:42:50 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.180.98.5 with HTTP; Thu, 3 Nov 2011 10:42:50 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Thu, 3 Nov 2011 13:42:50 -0400
Message-ID: <CAGFTUwN82LOFk_NW-E-+MuwL9ApsyAb_9y8KtDmhvaOZ6mbhKA@mail.gmail.com>
From: "b. f." <bf1783@googlemail.com>
To: freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.org, freebsd-current@FreeBSD.org, 
	Matthias Apitz <guru@unixarea.de>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Cc: 
Subject: Re: 10.0-CUR r226986 && ports (general)
X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
Reply-To: bf1783@gmail.com
List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD <freebsd-ports.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports>,
	<mailto:freebsd-ports-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-ports>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-ports@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-ports-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports>,
	<mailto:freebsd-ports-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 03 Nov 2011 17:42:52 -0000

> > > It turns out that the problem is more general! A lot of ./configure
> > > scripts are detecting in 10-CUR that they can't or should not build
> > > shared libs; the problem is that the OS is detected now as
> >
> > As a temporary workaround, add "WITH_FBSD10_FIX=1" to /etc/make.conf.
>
> ports/UPDATING and some of the mails in the archive of -current
> recommend setting UNAME_r=9.0-CURRENT; is this the same or which method
> is prefered?

No, it is not the same.  You can either masquerade, by setting UNAME_r
and OSVERSION, or by editing the headers and scripts that define them;
or you can use WITH_FBSD10_FIX for ports that define HAS_CONFIGURE
(which is implied by USE_AUTOTOOLS and GNU_CONFIGURE).  Right now the
masquerading is probably safer, because there are some problems with
the fix that are still being resolved -- and a few ports that may fail
despite the fix.  But of course if you help to test without
masquerading, these problems will be resolved sooner.

b.