Date: Wed, 24 Nov 1999 15:00:22 -0800 From: Manfred Antar <mantar@pacbell.net> To: Erik <erikk@infowest.com>, freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: ports/15029: XFree86 3.3.5 port is labeled as broken and so fails to build at all Message-ID: <4.2.2.19991124145732.00aa3ec0@pozo.com> In-Reply-To: <199911242210.OAA28816@freefall.freebsd.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
At 02:10 PM 11/24/99 -0800, Erik wrote: >The following reply was made to PR ports/15029; it has been noted by GNATS. > >From: "Erik" <erikk@infowest.com> >To: Bill@infowest.com, Fumerol@infowest.com >Cc: >Subject: Re: ports/15029: XFree86 3.3.5 port is labeled as broken and so >fails to build at all >Date: Wed, 24 Nov 1999 14:53:05 -0700 (MST) > > Bill Fumerol <billf@chc-chimes.com> said: > >On Sun, 21 Nov 1999 erikk@infowest.com wrote: > > > >> I just barely installed 3.3-STABLE from the November 19th snapshot > then yesterday (20th) CVSup'd STABLE and PORTS and succeeded in > building world. I did not install X since I decided to build it from > the port. When attempting to build from the > /usr/ports/x11/XFree86/ directory, the port is labeled as BROKEN in the > Makefile. How can I install X as a port if the port is broken? > Is there a fix coming? Any ideas how soon? > >> >How-To-Repeat: > > Try installing X cleanly from the ports collection (as of Nov. 20th > 1999) on any 3.3-STABLE box and it will fail because the Makefile > says the port is broken. > > > >Thank you for this insight into the ports system. If the port is marked > >broken, one would assume there is a reason behind it. > > > >The port will have to be fixed to not think cpp is at /lib/cpp, fixed > >to use -lcrypt appropriatly, fixed to actually _build_ X servers, fixed > > > to not try and use its own getenv() and a couple of other things first. > > > >Patches accepted. > > > >-- > >- bill fumerola - billf@chc-chimes.com - BF1560 - computer horizons corp - > >- ph:(800) 252-2421 - bfumerol@computerhorizons.com - billf@FreeBSD.org - > > I understand there is a reason. I'm just a bit puzzled by it. I > commented out > the BROKEN line from the Makefile and it built cleanly and installed my > preferred > X server just fine and seems to work okay. I assume there are some services > that are affected by the getenv() problem and/or the -lcrypt problem but > I must > not be using them (I then built the KDE port and its working great on > top of the > "broken" X port). So what's up? Why cannot it NOT be labeled as broken > in the > meantime since it seems to work just fine for basic X workstation > stuff? Is there > a mechanism for ports that would permit something like "WARNING: There > are several > problems with this port that have not yet been addressed including 1) > <insert problem> > 2) .... N) Do you wish to ATTEMPT to build this port ANYWAY? (y/N):" > and let me > as the port user decide if I'd like to chance it? > > Wondering, > ERIK > The port is just broken on current systems (4.0 current) with the new compiler gcc version 2.95.2 19991024 (release). If you are using the older version of gcc or egcs it will build. At least that has been my experience Manfred ===================== || mantar@pacbell.net || || Ph. (415) 681-6235 || ===================== To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-ports" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4.2.2.19991124145732.00aa3ec0>