Sounds to me like there are fixes in the pipeline from Mike and Thomas. Hopefully they'll get that committed in the next day or two so that KDE can be happy on -CURRENT before the snapshot.
Robert N M Watson FreeBSD Core Team, TrustedBSD Project [EMAIL PROTECTED] NAI Labs, Safeport Network Services On Fri, 8 Mar 2002, Peter Pentchev wrote: > On Fri, Mar 08, 2002 at 10:17:16AM -0600, David W. Chapman Jr. wrote: > > > > currently kde doesn't work due to binuntils update. It may work now > > > > after the most recent binutils update, but we have to recompile kde to > > > > see that I believe, andkdelibs cannot be compiled which builds > > > > kde-config which the rest of the kde meta-ports try to run. > [snip] > > I'm not the only one that is experiencing it either, here is what I > > was told by Alan Eldridge <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > > > On Tue, Mar 05, 2002 at 05:26:27PM -0600, David W. Chapman Jr. wrote: > > >When I try to build kdelibs2 I get the following under recent > > >-current builds > > > > > >,.deps/kextsock.pp -c kextsock.cpp -fPIC -DPIC -o .libs/kextsock.o > > >kextsock.cpp: In method `struct kde_addrinfo * > > >KExtendedSocketLookup::results()' > > >: > > >kextsock.cpp:294: implicit declaration of function `int __htons(...)' > > >kextsock.cpp:353: implicit declaration of function `int __htonl(...)' > > > > Yes. Recent changes to netinet/in.h have made it require the inclusion > > of arpa/inet.h. As well, arpa/inet.h must include netinet/in.h. IOW, > > each > > of these files must #include the other in order to work correctly. > > > > As you might guess, this is a less than desirable situation. A > > #includes > > B and B #includes A is a very bad arrangement. However, unless both > > files > > are overhauled, that is what will have to happen. > > FWIW, Alan filed a PR about that - bin/35598. > > G'luck, > Peter > > -- > Peter Pentchev [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] > PGP key: http://people.FreeBSD.org/~roam/roam.key.asc > Key fingerprint FDBA FD79 C26F 3C51 C95E DF9E ED18 B68D 1619 4553 > What would this sentence be like if it weren't self-referential? > To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message