Date: Sun, 04 Jun 2006 20:36:26 +0930 From: Wayne Sierke <ws@au.dyndns.ws> To: Kaiwai Gardiner <kaiwai.gardiner@gmail.com> Cc: stable@freebsd.org, doug <doug@fledge.watson.org>, Manfred Lotz <manfred.lotz@arcor.de> Subject: Re: xorg build failed Message-ID: <1149419186.50259.56.camel@au.dyndns.ws> In-Reply-To: <d35edc910606040229i7820ee6ar73e3357dc932c0e5@mail.gmail.com> References: <d35edc910606032102y6b89b650sfae9d33c228fe1ba@mail.gmail.com> <200606040914.k549Evl9094395@juno.lyxys.ka.sub.org> <d35edc910606040229i7820ee6ar73e3357dc932c0e5@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sun, 2006-06-04 at 21:29 +1200, Kaiwai Gardiner wrote: > One would ask as to why xorg has failed to compile, and it appears no > one else here has experienced the same issue; hence the reason I > suggested a clean removal of installed ports and a vanilla compile of > it. > > I've updated my ports from the cvs, and haven't experienced an xorg > compilation issue - I compile from the standard /usr/ports/x11/xorg > location, and I don't see to suffer the same issues - co-incidence or > simply being boring with the locating of things has saved me from > compilation problems? > > Matty > If the OP's problem is merely a result of using WRKDIRPREFIX then something is buggy and needs attention. As mentioned in man ports, it can be useful if /usr/ports is on a read-only filesystem, e.g. cdrom. Another reason, for which I've used it, is if there is insufficient free space for the temporary work files in /usr/ports. Perhaps a more useful comment would by why you think /var/tmp could be a "weird", or rather a problematic, location? For the OP: Is there anything significant about your /var/tmp? (Does it have enough free space? Is it mounted noexec, etc.?) Wayne
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?1149419186.50259.56.camel>