Date: Sun, 3 Jul 2011 01:15:59 +0000 From: "b. f." <bf1783@googlemail.com> To: Robert Huff <roberthuff@rcn.com> Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org, Robert Bonomi <bonomi@mail.r-bonomi.com> Subject: Re: What is xz ? Message-ID: <CAGFTUwNoUqBo1Xrc7wKp5vtvtXqNa4nWF497E=3tv9N8W9dq1g@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <19983.43472.728768.889910@jerusalem.litteratus.org> References: <CAGFTUwOp7ZtyU34o0X4epWgCz39vHGXtXzFcaGH3n9gwSPJe_Q@mail.gmail.com> <19983.43472.728768.889910@jerusalem.litteratus.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 7/2/11, Robert Huff <roberthuff@rcn.com> wrote: > > b. f. writes: > >> > It is part of '7.2-RELEASE', Dunno about 7.1 >> >> Hmm. Are you sure? If this is true, the archivers/xz port needs >> to be patched to IGNORE those branches of 7 that have xz. > > Is that necessarily true? > For comparison: the default system compiler is gcc-4.2.1 (I > believe). There are several higher numbered versions in ports. You mean, if xz is actually in FreeBSD 7, which doesn't seem to be the case, is it absolutely necessary to disable builds of archivers/xz on 7? Or, for that matter, on 8 and 9? -- well, no, it isn't strictly necessary, but what's the point of not disabling the port when the same version of xz is in both the base system and the port, and rtld's default search pattern will favor the former over the latter? With the different versions of gcc, you are at least getting some functional differences. If naddy updates the port to 5.1.1 or 5.0.3, the case might be different. b.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CAGFTUwNoUqBo1Xrc7wKp5vtvtXqNa4nWF497E=3tv9N8W9dq1g>