From ade@lovett.com Tue Aug 17 12:13:10 1999
Return-Path: <ade@lovett.com>
Received: from zen.lovett.com (zen.lovett.com [216.60.121.162])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 09B4F1578E
	for <FreeBSD-gnats-submit@freebsd.org>; Tue, 17 Aug 1999 12:13:05 -0700 (PDT)
	(envelope-from ade@lovett.com)
Received: from ade by zen.lovett.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1)
	id 11Gofu-0006Zd-00
	for FreeBSD-gnats-submit@freebsd.org; Tue, 17 Aug 1999 14:13:34 -0500
Message-Id: <E11Gofu-0006Zd-00@zen.lovett.com>
Date: Tue, 17 Aug 1999 14:13:34 -0500
From: Ade Lovett <ade@lovett.com>
Reply-To: ade@lovett.com
To: FreeBSD-gnats-submit@freebsd.org
Subject: Dependency updates for lang/egcs
X-Send-Pr-Version: 3.2

>Number:         13205
>Category:       ports
>Synopsis:       Dependency updates for lang/egcs
>Confidential:   no
>Severity:       serious
>Priority:       medium
>Responsible:    cpiazza
>State:          closed
>Quarter:        
>Keywords:       
>Date-Required:  
>Class:          change-request
>Submitter-Id:   current-users
>Arrival-Date:   Tue Aug 17 12:20:01 PDT 1999
>Closed-Date:    Tue Aug 17 12:37:17 PDT 1999
>Last-Modified:  Wed Aug 18 15:30:01 PDT 1999
>Originator:     Ade Lovett
>Release:        FreeBSD 4.0-CURRENT i386
>Organization:
Lovett Network Consultancy
>Environment:

	Up-to-date ports tree (via cvsup)

>Description:

	The changes to lang/egcs to use gcc-2.95 break a number of
	ports that depend on egcc and eg++ being installed by this
	port.  The new names are gcc295 and g++295 respectively.

	I've already been in contact with David O'Brien about this,
	who asked me to send-pr in the (trivial) changes.

	Ports affected are:

	audio/kdemultimedia11-i18n
	converters/kdesupport11-i18n
	deskutils/korganizer11-i18n
	devel/ORBacus
	devel/gnustep
	devel/mico
	games/flightgear
	games/kdegames11-i18n
	graphics/kdegraphics11-i18n
	java/guavac
	java/shujit
	misc/kdeutils11-i18n
	net/kdenetwork11-i18n
	textproc/aspell
	www/mozilla
	x11/kdebase11-i18n
	x11/kdelibs11-i18n
	x11-clocks/kdetoys11-i18n
	x11-toolkits/gtk--
	x11-toolkits/plib
	x11-toolkits/qt-i18n


>How-To-Repeat:

	With the gcc-2.95 version of lang/egcs, try to build any
	of the above ports.

>Fix:

	uuencoded, gzipped tarball attached.  Creates a directory
	patches/, containing one patch for each of the above
	mentioned ports.

	Note:  this just fixes the dependencies for the new
	lang/egcs -- I have absolutely no idea at all whether
	any of the ports will build with this new compiler,
	certainly textproc/aspell has some problems
	(see PR/13166).


begin 644 patches.tar.gz
M'XL("`ZSN3<``W!A=&-H97,N=&%R`.U<;7/:N!;.5_@5FC0?]@XQ^-W`-/>&
M)"3+ED`OD&[OS,YDC*V`@[%9VS3I=O+?KV0;,#(@F@:'9/3,U"9%1S9(S^-S
MCHZ8Z($QA'[I8(<`,J\I"C@``&BJ')X!X.-S_`=0-465)$&2!0`$7I:U`Z#L
M\J9FF/J![@%PH)MP8[N'(81V%C>4+2;Q^(],.)[:@36&IJ4+`F<)9>>EKB'P
MO"J3XYX8?T73B/&7)54]`/Q+W<`FS,;?<]U@4[MW.OX<QP%]:EKNRAE0NM9'
M\,ZR8='UK$&N-X6@-AT`00."4.7+55X%0J52R1<*A6UZ(3J0^*JL11V<G@).
M4HXKH!`>3T_SH&@YACTU(?C8]\WBQ/6"XL2#Q?'HWWF`W[T#1S_:W2_U3K?1
M;CV!CTAE$.0\=WY^DH,#PT"OOG[%+PN%/'=VTVA>W%[4/]=;%]T3@-^O'OWX
MW.[TNA>-SE/)UIU!"?VOGR]@>_2V6%'0:]P#ZB#\@^@C:K.F%U"$CFG=1;>:
M_B"N'X2?Y+6'/\E_?SK!-_?"Y#^@\U_E%8+_DB;SC/]9`//?<)UOT`N@MV(:
M4!6@O%"`K?I9Z@(+0%6H+#1`U+`&A,=WI@'X5G&C]MD?E^W.=:WW!$Y.P"&T
M[PY?4P7F_'>]@>Y8_T#O-?@OI/C/:XS_60#S'W%U-`TL>\4LH-*_LJ#_-MVD
MV:\D/0`I]`"D]\?^O?4`9OQO=\YT8^KOY!H4_@NR0,9_HB")C/]9(.+_-VC/
M9@"-\6BL$HQ?94AP7$%F0N()SQ\+$GK$AR?,\O-VZ[)Q==.IW]9;7TYRF&\&
MZAN=+YNUJ^[)(=<&W,2:P$-,*=N'M*<IUVR<=7L7B,.H3:=^V?B*:&GU2XBM
M'#Y;4EGEIL[(<1\<[LZ#$)$2&6(MZ=2;3R%[.;%8$8JJB`W]P$0W5-3S!4K'
M1S]JG?/?GSA,\+YMSOJ>=XSZ5)8ZC#_/<VYX9W>KN]-@XQW'HD;J*<`JNT8*
MN15CC)NO'&129$$DOFNU.MUU9+!N!LU$^:9;O_V*OJ.3W'?HO[8,OQIF^C]P
MD!#"R4ZN0?/_-"VE_Y(@,/W/`@O]CV<`5?\%4O])0U+_Q:J0\/%$,8SPQ+F/
ME_+B).S%\7EPUFE_JK=.<KG#KNMYWX]!,+1\@.4*F"[T@>,&X,'U1L!UP"42
MK[/N!1)"L?@8/2C6N(<\J5RY#9X@U[EI;=<0NXR1STGH5VZCDUA8NL#FIN$E
M8K<TH6.+K^EWW3,-UX0FB+4<>-"&N@^!,QWW45@.+`=\;C:ZO47(.>/_V#+<
M7<TQ>OZ7S/\(BL+ROYE@P7\\`ZCD%TGR+UFEF2\E<CM"F-\57B2_FPSO5L9W
MF\BZQ*0HP%L3X6UF9(*$R(](&`4C`0G1DM4CBH0#U[5'5H`>MK@!^&L?G(X9
M_^]L:S`,!E#W7OX:5/[+(OG\UR2%\3\+8/X/]/'2#*"J@+10@;6VI!9(\UQ1
MZ`4HQV7D!>#C\[5`(DA?B+5@[3,Z9'HD%X64)27,B&QCF2`RNR;ZQ`XT?XOZ
M[)[76_7._VY[[7:S^Z]](/D&)-9_PJ%\^>SO%OQ74^L_DLCXGPD6_"=F`%4$
M9%($UG5`KOH*545EJ[Y[@B3_/7TRM(R7EX"?7_^1>9&M_V:"D/_QP*^8!%05
M4!(JL$4WI!:@"$%):($::H'*M"`SS/-_4_V;;NSF&M3GOY3*_R$#QO\L@/E_
MCX8^G@!4OB<*OE:9D5Z_/+=X[QD`O)QP=5W[5'];ZPDS_OO#Z;VUD0#/!YW_
MJ?A?$%G^+Q/,^1]-`"K_-8+_A!G)?V7I^2Y4CC7$_TK,_\T*L([_8CKJ7RQP
M]BVG].M/]L+VM/^S\ZG;P6)R]`.]#-M%7\D;48"$_Q_6[KQ._"^EXG^5U7]E
M`LS_L>4;Y`2@"D&B[G.C/>GQ2U6>9]'_WB#!?P<&>#DU^_I/127W?TB:R/S_
M3(#YCP8^/?Y4`4A4?F[N(*T`HK10`+F,%2`\OC,%V-.*[V7,^*_[$VCO:'[3
MZC^E%/^1_\^>_YD`\S^`C\'$<XUX$M"8+R8J0->9DG&`6E42JW\2#@/P`3/^
M`[C0`P@,#Z*36<WE-'`!#8@+5K!%&;?X<^B.T3NY/UQ_"*XLV[;T,?AXC_XZ
M_7MJ&:,BDAXD$!_RW`=PU#"K8'8?Q]^`4(PBD!)?+N%DA%KE*U6I#/PAM$W7
M&8+ZXP0<Y0NK+.784BXAR1+%JJS@Q<]['P[0S45VZ**([1>-;J]5NT;!?_1%
M<$51*XI1T".%!:_1"7_@7.XNF%1+)70LCDS3UOM^T7"+]Y/29-HO]5S7GM&Q
M!/Y:-!_K:(HZQ0?8'^M^`#UD,PXMXK:X)O.ZUFCUT+]ZYR2'M=,_C2N!T%`.
M\H7DV\M?'B48XV;"BZM"L>BN2+9L6'==(<V%]5*>RL!L7IA=H]L)*;YJW=S.
MRT3?5GIFYYC7?[G_(%KI.[D&O?XKE?\5-5;_F0FP_C\\/,S&GZK]B>K/56:D
M[A.[^_BP]I/_55^/3-;0Q">=*T[G>Z@BLSI=G)097`06Z<Q_<$ZJV3ZO-<]J
MW7J4EAK85E\0.<-U[JS!W@A0(O[KZS[<1?IGB_RO2L9_@LSXGPDP_Q\%@1A_
MJ@PDZD`W6*<C/UE.1'[A7E_YW>WU17?-A;2J[@W+UR/!?[S/YW7XKZ;V_PJL
M_CL;)/B?&'\J_Z44_U=9I[V!I2CPW>9^WT3F)T*"_X'[_97XG_K]'TED^W^S
M0<Q_SK!=8T1.`ZH,R$LR0.F$]`;D>28I5`,Y5`/Y/:K!K#[\O[W;J\;E;>U+
MK=&LG37K>U`</J__"D8<MZ-K4/FOD/&_H$@L_YL)9OQ/[DWB."KQU67BK[%.
M,UX1$]F`\-<^Q%_^M8^?VHB^13:`ON5\FVS`&ZD'F_%_@ORW75V#RG]QQ?Y/
M5O^="5+\QQ.!2G]M#?V7C$GOOS+_N<"8_>60_2^Y`^S9&\">O_^+6%S8:[*O
MP(S_?P<[</QC_/S^+Y%GZ[_9(,7_>")0):"\1@)(^[0*B(D<(/N]/P8&!@8&
E!@8&!@8&!@8&!@8&!@8&!@8&!@8&!@8&AA?`_P'1^'^``'@``/N]
`
end


>Release-Note:
>Audit-Trail:
Responsible-Changed-From-To: freebsd-ports->cpiazza  
Responsible-Changed-By: cpiazza 
Responsible-Changed-When: Tue Aug 17 12:31:57 PDT 1999 
Responsible-Changed-Why:  
I was about to do this anyway :) 
State-Changed-From-To: open->closed  
State-Changed-By: cpiazza 
State-Changed-When: Tue Aug 17 12:37:17 PDT 1999 
State-Changed-Why:  
Changes committed, thanks! 

From: asami@freebsd.org (Satoshi - Ports Wraith - Asami)
To: ade@lovett.com
Cc: FreeBSD-gnats-submit@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: ports/13205: Dependency updates for lang/egcs
Date: 17 Aug 1999 15:37:01 -0700

  * 	The changes to lang/egcs to use gcc-2.95 break a number of
  * 	ports that depend on egcc and eg++ being installed by this
  * 	port.  The new names are gcc295 and g++295 respectively.
 
 In order to avoid having to change all the ports again when they are
 updated to gcc296 (or whatever), should we handle this in bsd.port.mk?
 
 I can add something like
 
 .if defined(USE_NEWGCC)
 CC=     gcc295
 CXX=    g++295
 BUILD_DEPENDS= gcc295:${PORTSDIR}/lang/egcs
 .endif
 
 to bsd.port.mk and the ports can just define USE_NEWGCC.
 
 Satoshi
 

From: Ade Lovett <ade@lovett.com>
To: Satoshi - Ports Wraith - Asami <asami@freebsd.org>
Cc: FreeBSD-gnats-submit@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: ports/13205: Dependency updates for lang/egcs
Date: Tue, 17 Aug 1999 17:52:23 -0500

 On Tue, Aug 17, 1999 at 03:37:01PM -0700, Satoshi - Ports Wraith - Asami wrote:
 > 
 > In order to avoid having to change all the ports again when they are
 > updated to gcc296 (or whatever), should we handle this in bsd.port.mk?
 > 
 > I can add something like
 > 
 > .if defined(USE_NEWGCC)
 > CC=     gcc295
 > CXX=    g++295
 > BUILD_DEPENDS= gcc295:${PORTSDIR}/lang/egcs
 > .endif
 > 
 > to bsd.port.mk and the ports can just define USE_NEWGCC.
 
 
 I think that's a pretty elegant solution, yes -- David was mentioning
 an upgrade to gcc-2.95.1 which may or may not (I haven't looked)
 change the names of the executables again.  I think we can safely say
 that there will be new releases of this gcc before everyone has
 migrated to a 4.x system, so it makes sense to drop it in.
 
 Of course, it doesn't deal with the extreme weirdness with LIBSTDC
 variable hacking in devel/ORBacus/Makefile, but that's possibly
 a good thing -- I don't understand that bit at all..
 
 -aDe
 
 -- 
 Ade Lovett, Austin, TX.
 

From: asami@freebsd.org (Satoshi - Ports Wraith - Asami)
To: Ade Lovett <ade@lovett.com>
Cc: FreeBSD-gnats-submit@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: ports/13205: Dependency updates for lang/egcs
Date: 17 Aug 1999 16:22:30 -0700

  * From: Ade Lovett <ade@lovett.com>
 
  * > .if defined(USE_NEWGCC)
  * > CC=     gcc295
  * > CXX=    g++295
  * > BUILD_DEPENDS= gcc295:${PORTSDIR}/lang/egcs
  * > .endif
  * > 
  * > to bsd.port.mk and the ports can just define USE_NEWGCC.
 
 Actually, I can even pull in the test for ${OSVERSION}.
 
 .if defined(USE_NEWGCC) && ${OSVERSION} < 400004
 CC=     gcc295
 CXX=    g++295
 BUILD_DEPENDS= gcc295:${PORTSDIR}/lang/egcs
 .endif
 
 That will make the depending ports much simpler.
 
  * Of course, it doesn't deal with the extreme weirdness with LIBSTDC
  * variable hacking in devel/ORBacus/Makefile, but that's possibly
  * a good thing -- I don't understand that bit at all..
 
  ;)
 
 Satoshi
 

From: Ade Lovett <ade@lovett.com>
To: Satoshi - Ports Wraith - Asami <asami@freebsd.org>
Cc: freebsd-gnats-submit@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: ports/13205: Dependency updates for lang/egcs
Date: Wed, 18 Aug 1999 13:21:44 -0500

 On Tue, Aug 17, 1999 at 04:22:30PM -0700, Satoshi - Ports Wraith - Asami wrote:
 > 
 > Actually, I can even pull in the test for ${OSVERSION}.
 > 
 > .if defined(USE_NEWGCC) && ${OSVERSION} < 400004
 > CC=     gcc295
 > CXX=    g++295
 > BUILD_DEPENDS= gcc295:${PORTSDIR}/lang/egcs
 > .endif
 > 
 > That will make the depending ports much simpler.
 
 Yup.  But it might lead to inconsistencies if the system compiler
 in -current is different from that specified by USE_NEWGCC.
 
 I know we don't "support" -current as a ports building platform, but
 I can envisage a case where the only reason a port won't build on
 -current is because of a system compiler problem.  The USE_NEWGCC
 here doesn't even give us the option of being able to test out the
 theories by specifying a "known working" compiler.
 
 But I guess we can cross that bridge when we come to it :)
 
 One other thing.. it's probably worth adding a comment in the
 lang/egcs Makefile pointing back to this USE_NEWGCC definition, so
 that when the port gets updated (and the executable names change)
 there is an explicit "go fix this macro" edict..
 
 -aDe
 
 -- 
 Ade Lovett, Austin, TX.
 

From: asami@freebsd.org (Satoshi - Ports Wraith - Asami)
To: Ade Lovett <ade@lovett.com>
Cc: freebsd-gnats-submit@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: ports/13205: Dependency updates for lang/egcs
Date: 18 Aug 1999 15:11:22 -0700

  * From: Ade Lovett <ade@lovett.com>
 
  * > Actually, I can even pull in the test for ${OSVERSION}.
  * > 
  * > .if defined(USE_NEWGCC) && ${OSVERSION} < 400004
  * > CC=     gcc295
  * > CXX=    g++295
  * > BUILD_DEPENDS= gcc295:${PORTSDIR}/lang/egcs
  * > .endif
  * > 
  * > That will make the depending ports much simpler.
  * 
  * Yup.  But it might lead to inconsistencies if the system compiler
  * in -current is different from that specified by USE_NEWGCC.
 
 The above ".if" statement excludes -current.  In -current, we always
 use "gcc/g++".
 
  * I know we don't "support" -current as a ports building platform, but
 
 No, you don't.  Please don't spread misinformation. :)  We DO support
 -current as well as -stable.  It has been that way ever since the
 Ports Collection started and has only been false for a couple of
 months when we had the glitch with the 2.2/3.0 split a while ago.
 
  * One other thing.. it's probably worth adding a comment in the
  * lang/egcs Makefile pointing back to this USE_NEWGCC definition, so
  * that when the port gets updated (and the executable names change)
  * there is an explicit "go fix this macro" edict..
 
 Sure.
 
 -PW
 

From: Ade Lovett <ade@lovett.com>
To: Satoshi - Ports Wraith - Asami <asami@freebsd.org>
Cc: freebsd-gnats-submit@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: ports/13205: Dependency updates for lang/egcs
Date: Wed, 18 Aug 1999 17:24:15 -0500

 On Wed, Aug 18, 1999 at 03:11:22PM -0700, Satoshi - Ports Wraith - Asami wrote:
 > 
 > The above ".if" statement excludes -current.  In -current, we always
 > use "gcc/g++".
 
 I'm aware of that :)  The point I was making is that there is the
 possibility that a port will compile and run successfully on -stable
 (using gcc295) but might fail on -current (using gcc, assuming the
 system compiler isn't the same as USE_NEWGCC).  This may or may not
 be a bad thing..
 
 
 >  * I know we don't "support" -current as a ports building platform, but
 > 
 > No, you don't.  Please don't spread misinformation. :)  We DO support
 > -current as well as -stable.
 
 Sorry, the comment was a little tongue-in-cheek (hence the quotes), I'm
 just trying to think of all the possibilities here for a case when the
 same port works on -stable, but not -current, when the only difference
 is the compiler.
 
 It's probably not that much of an issue, so I'll shut up now :)
 
 -aDe
 
 -- 
 Ade Lovett, Austin, TX.
 
>Unformatted:
