Re: lang/gcc* package builds vs. release/11.0.1/ and the future release/11.1.0 because of vm_ooffset_t and vm_pindex_t changes and how the lang/gcc* work

Am 29. Juni 2017 18:55:59 GMT+08:00 schrieb Mark Millard : >I'm not currently set up to run more than head on >any of amd64, powerpc64, powerpc, aarch64, or armv6/7 >(which are all I target). And I'm in the middle of >attempting a fairly large jump to head -r320458 on

Re: lang/gcc* package builds vs. release/11.0.1/ and the future release/11.1.0 because of vm_ooffset_t and vm_pindex_t changes and how the lang/gcc* work

On 2017-Jun-29, at 3:10 AM, Gerald Pfeifer wrote: > Am 28. Juni 2017 22:38:52 GMT+08:00 schrieb Mark Millard dsl-only.net>: >> A primary test is building lang/gcc5-devel under release/11.0.1 >> and then using it under stable/11 or some draft of release/11.1.0 . > > Thank you, Mark. Let me

Re: lang/gcc* package builds vs. release/11.0.1/ and the future release/11.1.0 because of vm_ooffset_t and vm_pindex_t changes and how the lang/gcc* work

Am 28. Juni 2017 22:38:52 GMT+08:00 schrieb Mark Millard : >A primary test is building lang/gcc5-devel under release/11.0.1 >and then using it under stable/11 or some draft of release/11.1.0 . Thank you, Mark. Let me know how it went. In the meantime I'll prepare the

Re: lang/gcc* package builds vs. release/11.0.1/ and the future release/11.1.0 because of vm_ooffset_t and vm_pindex_t changes and how the lang/gcc* work

On 2017-Jun-28, at 3:21 AM, Gerald Pfeifer wrote: > I am testing a patch for gcc5-devel right now that will disable fixincludes > (or rather its fixed files) being packaged. > > Should that work fine for you, I will push this back to gcc5 the following > days. > > That

Re: lang/gcc* package builds vs. release/11.0.1/ and the future release/11.1.0 because of vm_ooffset_t and vm_pindex_t changes and how the lang/gcc* work

Hi everyone, I am testing a patch for gcc5-devel right now that will disable fixincludes (or rather its fixed files) being packaged. Should that work fine for you, I will push this back to gcc5 the following days. That said, the change that triggered this is what I would expect on CURRENT,

Re: lang/gcc* package builds vs. release/11.0.1/ and the future release/11.1.0 because of vm_ooffset_t and vm_pindex_t changes and how the lang/gcc* work

Top post on one point. . . Patrick Powell papowell at astart.com wrote on Mon Jun 26 14:10:44 UTC 2017 (He was quoting Gerald. I was also part of some earlier discussions.) > (Luckily this only hits with most -CURRENT versions of FreeBSD and > older packages only.) > > Gerald Unfortunately

Re: lang/gcc* package builds vs. release/11.0.1/ and the future release/11.1.0 because of vm_ooffset_t and vm_pindex_t changes and how the lang/gcc* work

I have reported this problem - see email to freebsd-stable Re: GCC + FreeBSD 11.0 Stable - stat.h does not have vm_ooffset_t definition Here is part of the discussion: On Sat, 29 Apr 2017, Dimitry Andric wrote: This is because gcc's fixincludes process makes copies of certain system headers

lang/gcc* package builds vs. release/11.0.1/ and the future release/11.1.0 because of vm_ooffset_t and vm_pindex_t changes and how the lang/gcc* work

The following is based mostly on an extraction from a private exchange in which a question was asked and my answer was unsettling: incompatibilities within the 11.* family. I would not normally send to re but doing so was explicitly mentioned. Hopefully this example is reasonable for doing that.