Date: Mon, 22 Oct 2007 01:17:37 -0400 From: Miles Nordin <carton@Ivy.NET> To: freebsd-sparc64@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Doesn't anything work around here? Message-ID: <oq7ilfsp72.fsf@castrovalva.Ivy.NET> In-Reply-To: <ffg2gk$1n1r$1@nermal.rz1.convenimus.net> (Christian Baer's message of "Sun, 21 Oct 2007 19:33:08 %2B0200 (CEST)") References: <ffg2gk$1n1r$1@nermal.rz1.convenimus.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--pgp-sign-Multipart_Mon_Oct_22_01:17:27_2007-1
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
>>>>> "cb" == Christian Baer <christian.baer@uni-dortmund.de> writes:
cb> What *really* annoys me about this is that noone has bothered
cb> to mark the ports as "not working (yet)".
cb> Why hasn't anyone done that with these (and possibly other)
cb> ports yet? Thunderbird and Firefox have been broken for ages
sometimes there are reports of them working (a little). but, yeah, it
is reasonable to want to know, even before buying hardware much less
compiling, whether this port has a working browser or not.
Isn't there some spot in the FreeBSD base system where you have to
choose your thread library, and one works better on sparc64 than the
other? Is the thread library that works best on sparc64 set as the
default right now?
--pgp-sign-Multipart_Mon_Oct_22_01:17:27_2007-1
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (NetBSD)
iQCVAwUARxwycYnCBbTaW/4dAQKLywP+NpiW5Eevz5tm6tqhI1OKyyWFg3t+uIj9
t0CqDdW/cnFV5LQnge10B67W9qTtVfsyKX1/JGQmup6An35bw1la3dWSTyn+Wq+1
mExj3Xfy5c6E0JHyG4xLmvgikhjLcBt0OXEfboY/qdF9iujLXz/Uc/7SmUsJQeq0
mvCEsl+ZfGM=
=PJCc
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--pgp-sign-Multipart_Mon_Oct_22_01:17:27_2007-1--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?oq7ilfsp72.fsf>