Date: Mon, 03 Dec 2012 19:40:32 +0100 From: Hans Ottevanger <hans@beastielabs.net> To: Niclas Zeising <zeising@freebsd.org> Cc: toolchain@freebsd.org Subject: Re: [CFT] devel/binutils 2.23 Message-ID: <50BCF220.6040905@beastielabs.net> In-Reply-To: <50BA27F1.3080002@beastielabs.net> References: <201211141445.qAEEjTXQ047896@mech-cluster241.men.bris.ac.uk> <50A3FCEF.9060204@freebsd.org> <50A4A5A2.2000902@beastielabs.net> <50A4A69B.7030200@freebsd.org> <50B76AC2.4050207@freebsd.org> <50BA27F1.3080002@beastielabs.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 12/01/12 16:53, Hans Ottevanger wrote: > On 11/29/12 15:01, Niclas Zeising wrote: >> On 11/15/12 09:23, Niclas Zeising wrote: >>> On 2012-11-15 09:19, Hans Ottevanger wrote: >>>> On 11/14/12 21:19, Niclas Zeising wrote: >>>>> On 11/14/12 15:45, Anton Shterenlikht wrote: >>>>>> It installed fine on ia64 and sparc64, both -current. >>>>>> I don't know how to test. Please advise if there are >>>>>> simple tests. >>>>>> >>>>>> Also, just to check, I manually deleted *orig files >>>>>> from under files/ after applying the patch: >>>>>> >>>>>> # ls -al /usr/ports/devel/binutils/files/ >>>>>> total 20 >>>>>> drwxr-xr-x 2 root wheel 1024 Nov 14 12:58 . >>>>>> drwxr-xr-x 4 root wheel 512 Nov 14 13:00 .. >>>>>> -rw-r--r-- 1 root wheel 353 Nov 14 12:55 patch-bfd_Makefile.in >>>>>> -rw-r--r-- 1 root wheel 297 Nov 14 12:55 patch-gold_Makefile.in >>>>>> -rw-r--r-- 1 root wheel 471 Nov 14 12:55 patch-gold_script.cc >>>>>> # >>>>>> >>>>>> because I think all files in this directory >>>>>> will be used as patches, no matter the name. >>>>>> Am I wrong? >>>>>> >>>>>> Anton >>>>> >>>>> Just compile test some binaries and see that they link and work ok. >>>>> The .orig files are left over when running patch, and has to be removed. >>>>> Sorry if I wasn't clear on that in my previous mail. >>>>> Thanks for testing! >>>>> Regards! >>>> >>>> Please be aware that apparently something went wrong with the release of >>>> binutils-2.23 (see the discussion ending in: >>>> >>>> http://sourceware.org/ml/binutils/2012-10/msg00339.html >>>> >>>> though I doubt the glitches will affect your usage) and it has been >>>> re-released as binutils-2.23.1. Maybe it is better to base the update if >>>> the binutils port on that release. >>>> >>> >>> I noticed that late last night, but haven't had time to update the patch >>> yet. Thank you for pointing it out. >>> Regards! >>> >> >> Hi! >> Apologies for the delay. Attached is a patch that updates binutils from >> 2.22 to 2.23.1. Please test it. The plan is to commit it once 9.1 is >> out the door and the feature freeze on the ports tree is lifted. >> Regards! >> > > I tested your patch on amd64 and i386 systems (all a recent 8.3-STABLE > r243569). > > The patch applied cleanly and the resulting port compiled without > problems, both by directly using make and by using portmaster. I tested > the results by recompiling a fairly large application (my gcc based > cross-build environment for embedded development) using gcc 4.7 from the > ports and the new binutils-2.23.1 on both i386 and amd64, Everything > functioned as it should and up to now there were no surprises whatsoever. > > I do not have the systems to test the other architectures, but I will > retest on the 10.0-CURRENT i386 and amd64 systems that I expect to > install one of these days. I will come back to you to report on that. > > Kind regards, > > Hans Ottevanger > I have been taking a closer look at the output of make and find the following: => SHA256 Checksum OK for binutils-2.23.1.tar.bz2. ===> Patching for binutils-2.23.1 ===> Applying FreeBSD patches for binutils-2.23.1 I can't seem to find a patch in there anywhere. I can't seem to find a patch in there anywhere. I can't seem to find a patch in there anywhere. I can't seem to find a patch in there anywhere. I can't seem to find a patch in there anywhere. I can't seem to find a patch in there anywhere. I can't seem to find a patch in there anywhere. I can't seem to find a patch in there anywhere. I can't seem to find a patch in there anywhere. I can't seem to find a patch in there anywhere. I can't seem to find a patch in there anywhere. ===> binutils-2.23.1 depends on file: /usr/local/lib/libgmp.so - found This happens on both 8.3-STABLE and 10.0-CURRENT. It implies that 11 of the 14 patches in the directory "files" are not applied. I wonder how the binutils get to function at all without them, but the patches are probably for exceptional situations and other architectures then amd64 and i386. Kind regards, Hans Ottevanger
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?50BCF220.6040905>