Date: Sat, 11 Apr 2009 23:00:54 -0400 From: David Schultz <das@FreeBSD.ORG> To: Norikatsu Shigemura <nork@FreeBSD.ORG> Cc: Stanislav Sedov <stas@FreeBSD.ORG>, svn-src-head@FreeBSD.ORG, svn-src-all@FreeBSD.ORG, src-committers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: svn commit: r190943 - head/include Message-ID: <20090412030054.GA54299@zim.MIT.EDU> In-Reply-To: <20090412021841.673a200b.nork@FreeBSD.org> References: <200904111657.n3BGvpsC092703@svn.freebsd.org> <20090411210702.ce5325b9.stas@FreeBSD.org> <20090412021841.673a200b.nork@FreeBSD.org>
index | next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail
On Sun, Apr 12, 2009, Norikatsu Shigemura wrote: > On Sat, 11 Apr 2009 21:07:02 +0400 > Stanislav Sedov <stas@freebsd.org> wrote: > > > Log: > > > GNU Pth has some fragile kludges that were broken by r189828. > > > I've discussed this with the Pth maintainer and no clear solution > > > has emerged on the ports side of things, so for now, hack around > > > the issue in signal.h. > > Can't we just put a patch in ports tree itself? What meant under 'no > > clean solution emerged'? I can prepare a patch, if needed. > > I think so, too. I have a quick hack patch. As I mentioned to vd@ on 3/20, I'd prefer something like that. Does your proposed patch also work for the ports that depend on GNU Pth, some of which may depend on signal.h?home | help
Want to link to this message? Use this
URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20090412030054.GA54299>