Re: head -r324071 system clang 5 based powerpc64 building ports: lang/gcc7 messed up by a matching name vec_step? [renaming in tree-vect-loop.c avoids the issue]

[If work/gcc-7.2.0/gcc/tree-vect-loop.c avoids the name vec_step then it avoids the conflicting use for altivec support in the powerpc64 context. I used vec_step_renamed as the name in work/gcc-7.2.0/gcc/tree-vect-loop.c instead. Similarly for devel/powerpc64-gcc and likely other variants.] On

Re: Status of portupgrade and portmaster?

On 30/09/2017 18:06, Kevin Oberman wrote: > John did state that he would continue to support synth. I can't say if he > has continued to make contributions. In any case, only poudriere is > available for maintaining ports in HEAD and I, for one, feel that it is > simply unacceptable as it make

Re: Status of portupgrade and portmaster?

> John did state that he would continue to support synth. I can't say if he > has continued to make contributions. In any case, only poudriere is > available for maintaining ports in HEAD and I, for one, feel that it is > simply unacceptable as it make FreeBSD unusable for those of us with only >

Re: Status of portupgrade and portmaster?

On 2017-10-01 11:51, Matthew Seaman wrote: poudriere is really a very thin layer of shell scripts (and a few other bits) over the general ports make system. All of the really heavy lifting is done by the compilers and so forth /that you'ld have to invoke anyhow/. There is one tiny problem

Re: Status of portupgrade and portmaster?

On Sun, 1 Oct 2017 10:51:39 +0100, Matthew Seaman stated: >On 30/09/2017 18:06, Kevin Oberman wrote: >> John did state that he would continue to support synth. I can't say if he >> has continued to make contributions. In any case, only poudriere is >> available for maintaining ports in HEAD and

Debugging A Port

Hi, What action will make the Make command to recompile a source file? Thanks, Amit ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to

Re: Status of portupgrade and portmaster?

On 2017-10-01 18:24, RW via freebsd-ports wrote: Do you mean as opposed to installing the dependencies from the repository, or are you saying that it rebuilds them? Poudriere builds isolated, in jails. That means it's not reusing packages installed on the host, nor from another repo, if

lang/pdflib: I've submitted bugzilla 222722 with a patch for allowing lang/pdflib to build under __POWERPC__

I wrote in bugziila 222722: > [I tried to build math/gnuplot and it was > indirectly blocked by print/pdflib failing > to build for "missing" include files.] > > The following avoids print/pdflib classifying the > context as an old MAC context (pre-MACOSX) when > building for powerpc64 (for

Re: Debugging A Port

Thanks, It seems to work. On 01.10.2017 20:42, Kurt Jaeger wrote: Hi! What action will make the Make command to recompile a source file? That depends on the port, there's no generic way to say. Basically, the port framework adds a wrapper of targets around the upstream source Makefile and

Re: Debugging A Port

Hi! > What action will make the Make command to recompile a source file? That depends on the port, there's no generic way to say. Basically, the port framework adds a wrapper of targets around the upstream source Makefile and those targets can shield a recompile from happening. What sometimes

Re: Status of portupgrade and portmaster?

On Sun, 01 Oct 2017 12:26:25 +0200 Vlad K. wrote: > Another problem is poudriere's inability to reuse already installed > packages, if they're a dependency for something being built by it. > Personally I'd never use that option, as I want clean, isolated > rebuilds of everything affected, but I

Re: Status of portupgrade and portmaster?

On Sun, Oct 1, 2017 at 12:34 PM, Carmel NY wrote: > lifting leaving me free to work on more important projects. I suppose I could > always go back to “portupgrade”; however, I understand that it is not being > maintained either. FWIW, portupgrade has received enough

Re: Status of portupgrade and portmaster?

On 2017-10-02 00:19, RW via freebsd-ports wrote: I meant installing up-to-date packages from the *local* repository. So if only Firefox needs to be updated would Poudriere first install Firefox's dependencies into the jail from locally generated package files before building Firefox. Poudriere

Re: Status of portupgrade and portmaster?

On Sun, 01 Oct 2017 20:53:29 +0200 Vlad K. wrote: > On 2017-10-01 18:24, RW via freebsd-ports wrote: > > > > Do you mean as opposed to installing the dependencies from the > > repository, or are you saying that it rebuilds them? > > Poudriere builds isolated, in jails. That means it's not

Re: Status of portupgrade and portmaster?

On Fri, Sep 29, 2017 at 09:21:31PM +0200 I heard the voice of Marco Beishuizen, and lo! it spake thus: > > Using portupgrade every day and still works great. Tried portmaster > once but liked portupgrade more. I use poudriere just for testing > ports. I also use portupgrade constantly on several

FreeBSD Port: sudo-1.8.21p2 - 1.8.21p2 SegFaults

Hi Renato & ports : I was just stumble over this, with 12.0-CURRENT r323934, sudo 1.8.21p2 SegFaults when run in a bhyve VM - however, seemly on bare metal, its fine. sudo-1.8.20p2_3 runs just fine in bhyve VM. There are all my own builds of 12- and ports (via poudriere). I recompiled sudo

Re: Status of portupgrade and portmaster?

On 2017-10-01 12:34, Carmel NY wrote: 1. Does it determine out-of-date update packages automatically or does the user have to determine that what is out-of-date and feed them to poudriere manually and in the proper order? 2. From what I have read, the user is required to install each package