From owner-freebsd-gnome@freebsd.org Fri Feb 26 16:59:36 2021 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-gnome@mailman.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E9C165672A7 for ; Fri, 26 Feb 2021 16:59:36 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: from mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (unknown [127.0.1.3]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4DnG94661zz4YrQ for ; Fri, 26 Feb 2021 16:59:36 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: by mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) id D18FB567386; Fri, 26 Feb 2021 16:59:36 +0000 (UTC) Delivered-To: gnome@mailman.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D1631567385 for ; Fri, 26 Feb 2021 16:59:36 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: from mxrelay.nyi.freebsd.org (mxrelay.nyi.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:3]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256 client-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) client-digest SHA256) (Client CN "mxrelay.nyi.freebsd.org", Issuer "R3" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4DnG945W1Xz4YjR for ; Fri, 26 Feb 2021 16:59:36 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: from kenobi.freebsd.org (kenobi.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::50:1d]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (Client did not present a certificate) by mxrelay.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AC242629A for ; Fri, 26 Feb 2021 16:59:36 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: from kenobi.freebsd.org ([127.0.1.5]) by kenobi.freebsd.org (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id 11QGxawf063650 for ; Fri, 26 Feb 2021 16:59:36 GMT (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: (from www@localhost) by kenobi.freebsd.org (8.15.2/8.15.2/Submit) id 11QGxaNg063649 for gnome@FreeBSD.org; Fri, 26 Feb 2021 16:59:36 GMT (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) X-Authentication-Warning: kenobi.freebsd.org: www set sender to bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org using -f From: bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org To: gnome@FreeBSD.org Subject: [Bug 253870] devel/libgtop: fails to build on head after commit 2bfd8992c7c7 Date: Fri, 26 Feb 2021 16:59:36 +0000 X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC AssignedTo X-Bugzilla-Type: changed X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: Ports & Packages X-Bugzilla-Component: Individual Port(s) X-Bugzilla-Version: Latest X-Bugzilla-Keywords: X-Bugzilla-Severity: Affects Only Me X-Bugzilla-Who: madpilot@FreeBSD.org X-Bugzilla-Status: New X-Bugzilla-Resolution: X-Bugzilla-Priority: --- X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: gnome@FreeBSD.org X-Bugzilla-Flags: maintainer-feedback? X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: cc flagtypes.name attachments.created Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Bugzilla-URL: https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/ Auto-Submitted: auto-generated MIME-Version: 1.0 X-BeenThere: freebsd-gnome@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.34 Precedence: list List-Id: GNOME for FreeBSD -- porting and maintaining List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 26 Feb 2021 16:59:37 -0000 https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D253870 Guido Falsi changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |gnome@FreeBSD.org Attachment #222851| |maintainer-approval?(gnome@ Flags| |FreeBSD.org) --- Comment #3 from Guido Falsi --- Created attachment 222851 --> https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=3D222851&action= =3Dedit Patch using sys/types.h I'm using a slightly different patch. Actually that bool type should be the one expected by kernel own sources, w= hich is defined in types.h Hoisting it's inclusion and forcing _KERNEL defined warrants the correct includes. I'm not able to judge which one is the best approach. Obviously I'm biased towards my own patch :) --=20 You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are the assignee for the bug.=