From owner-freebsd-ports-bugs@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Aug 1 17:40:24 2005 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-ports-bugs@hub.freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-ports-bugs@hub.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9A7BE16A41F for ; Mon, 1 Aug 2005 17:40:24 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from gnats@FreeBSD.org) Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (freefall.freebsd.org [216.136.204.21]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5A72643D4C for ; Mon, 1 Aug 2005 17:40:24 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from gnats@FreeBSD.org) Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (gnats@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.13.3/8.13.3) with ESMTP id j71HeO8q072264 for ; Mon, 1 Aug 2005 17:40:24 GMT (envelope-from gnats@freefall.freebsd.org) Received: (from gnats@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.13.3/8.13.1/Submit) id j71HeOaj072263; Mon, 1 Aug 2005 17:40:24 GMT (envelope-from gnats) Date: Mon, 1 Aug 2005 17:40:24 GMT Message-Id: <200508011740.j71HeOaj072263@freefall.freebsd.org> To: freebsd-ports-bugs@FreeBSD.org From: Mike Edenfield Cc: Subject: Re: ports/80916: db43 does not build (with gcc4.0?) X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports-bugs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list Reply-To: Mike Edenfield List-Id: Ports bug reports List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 01 Aug 2005 17:40:24 -0000 The following reply was made to PR ports/80916; it has been noted by GNATS. From: Mike Edenfield To: bug-followup@FreeBSD.org, kutulu@kutulu.org Cc: Subject: Re: ports/80916: db43 does not build (with gcc4.0?) Date: Mon, 01 Aug 2005 13:32:22 -0400 I know this PR is closed but I wanted to make sure this got into the audit trail: The bug here is actually an rpcgen bug from FreeBSD 5.x and up; the main RPC program function is always emitted 'static' but the header file declares all functions, including that one, as 'extern'. This changed between 4.x and 5.x -- previously the 'extern' declaractor was not emitted at all. I've submitted a bug report for rpcgen; I don't know if that means we can remove this patch once rpcgen is fixed, since it has been "broken" since early in 5.x. --Mike