On Jun 18, 2014, at 4:32 PM, Craig Rodrigues <rodr...@freebsd.org> wrote:

> On Tue, Jun 17, 2014 at 11:59 PM, Dimitry Andric <d...@freebsd.org> wrote:
>> See r257658 which had fixed this, but it was reverted by Warner,
>> unfortunately.  This was one of the uses of the EARLY_BUILD flag which
>> was *not* redundant. :-/
> Warner,
> Is there a way to bring back the behavior of r257658 but without
> the way it was implemented with the EARLY_BUILD flag?
> It would be handy, as we can see by this thread discussion.

The EARLY_BUILD flag tightly coupled the bsd.*.mk files to the build system,
so I’l like to see it stay dead. 9.x assumes that by defining it, it can affect
the system installed .mk files in a specific way. This is an unwise assumption,
as this thread demonstrates.

The real problem, imho, is that the construct in bsd.prog.mk is generating a
dependency on the wrong C++ standard library. Why is it generating for the
g++ library when the compiler is clang? That seems like the real bug here.

I’ll also note that building release X-2 on head isn’t generally supported by
the project, but having said that, I’ll see what I can do. Surprisingly, I don’t
have a good -current environment setup on my fast build boxes, so I’ll
setup a quick jail and see if I can recreate.


Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail

Reply via email to