Date: Mon, 12 Dec 2011 10:03:14 -0800 From: Kevin Oberman <kob6558@gmail.com> To: Jason Hellenthal <jhell@dataix.net> Cc: ports@freebsd.org, gerald@freebsd.org Subject: Re: lang/gcc46 Message-ID: <CAN6yY1s=mL0xkRJU3j9%2BmALFJBnvyAD6UF1R-k0j0mfRzZFU7w@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <20111212173616.GA85305@DataIX.net> References: <20111212173616.GA85305@DataIX.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, Dec 12, 2011 at 9:36 AM, Jason Hellenthal <jhell@dataix.net> wrote: > > Hi Gerald, > > As a request once again similiar to one I have made in the past... Would = it be possible yet to slow down the update process for the gcc46 port ? > > This is turning out to be quite the pain in the U-Know-What with version = flapping and rebuilding because a port depends on it. If I am correct it is= updated weekly. I caught the tail end of the previous update and the day a= fter it was bumped to the next snapshot version & by the time both of those= were finished the port had once again been bumped to _1. > > Is there anything that could be done to stabalize this ... ? > > At this point I am left for the manual intervention of using +IGNOREME fi= les or excluding by whatever means neccesary as weekly updates seem complet= ely unneccesary now that alot of ports are shifting to depend on gcc46. > > Can a gcc46-devel port be branched for those that absolutely need the wee= kly updates ? +1 gcc46 is used by so many ports that I am continually re-building it and on slow machines, this takes a while. How about a gcc46-devel port that gets the regular updates and let gcc46 stay stable when there are not major fixes? - R. Kevin Oberman, Network Engineer E-mail: kob6558@gmail.com
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CAN6yY1s=mL0xkRJU3j9%2BmALFJBnvyAD6UF1R-k0j0mfRzZFU7w>