From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG  Mon May 12 00:04:46 2014
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org
 [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1])
 (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))
 (No client certificate requested)
 by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6F0817BE
 for <freebsd-ports@freebsd.org>; Mon, 12 May 2014 00:04:46 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from mail-vc0-f177.google.com (mail-vc0-f177.google.com
 [209.85.220.177])
 (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits))
 (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com",
 Issuer "Google Internet Authority G2" (verified OK))
 by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2618D2268
 for <freebsd-ports@freebsd.org>; Mon, 12 May 2014 00:04:45 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by mail-vc0-f177.google.com with SMTP id if17so3386509vcb.22
 for <freebsd-ports@freebsd.org>; Sun, 11 May 2014 17:04:39 -0700 (PDT)
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
 d=1e100.net; s=20130820;
 h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date
 :message-id:subject:to:cc:content-type;
 bh=+apA8l0VobdIinoiXDZeO77YjBq3rkTRHKESccB2fwo=;
 b=Df3E2ADiZOtYu525p8fQd+pU4GmwGdBFhCxSrk3Rr8yO/tR/uKh8lBMxUXmn4AGiq9
 LZFSlehxRI9k7oVQYqdgfJcA2w1jPxhCPdIO2qGqkNK6MTvixQSucpGR1qD/jLiPuid7
 VTSxlsOOaAZ2SsGHSIuK270WlLbVH5GaYqI05vvXhG/pRn2Z4AEBdpb8pk7Q1dJMa+LT
 Prgdj90PigFmSXsrlvNfqUxqq5oAHwkEZx+xZeIs2ltvzr9XORCHWPEkySAHGCAHVKW1
 TaGtTZo0z8XE8keeJYcvSR1RWAgfVijxoC7dvMlFRuV6Z+GH973qLZ5cYxnYuOAsQkMX
 vgkg==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQnRwVVpEe5rQ6DJ0v/XUTbt+Sd6TIJRDppxWSYoYxBpDNiIxsKpGbu4c9JST11epoaS8f3t
X-Received: by 10.220.103.141 with SMTP id k13mr3814606vco.25.1399853079666;
 Sun, 11 May 2014 17:04:39 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.58.178.139 with HTTP; Sun, 11 May 2014 17:04:19 -0700 (PDT)
X-Originating-IP: [71.181.235.37]
In-Reply-To: <CAFMeXOaxuQ0SKOiMB1TRbYL8F2R-spWyNY5ditG=pRq0DiLzvg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAFMeXOboxKFjYZpYNt0o0-LRKCfzQgj6_t9wSL0N1mK1LKpKSQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAFMeXOaFk0OvbA7f7E87P9rre4-FpjTaLGducZTpFGuNtUZNTA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAFMeXObnF_yFixBcMA6BVEVyzb-4zcweV80NJfah-mem-YSqag@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAFMeXOYHTJp8ZOUDCH5-YnzqT_x7UdrbWe02EJS89xO7OGHg0Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <alpine.LSU.2.11.1405091402460.2722@tuna.site> <536FD5F3.30006@freebsd.org>
 <CAFMeXOaxuQ0SKOiMB1TRbYL8F2R-spWyNY5ditG=pRq0DiLzvg@mail.gmail.com>
From: Geoff Speicher <geoff@sea-incorporated.com>
Date: Sun, 11 May 2014 20:04:19 -0400
Message-ID: <CAFMeXOb84q1OWN+aHw9Wq79mHSUuJcv8f7i8usQ0pbejkqQwHQ@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: devel/binutils and devel/gnulibiberty version mismatch
To: Niclas Zeising <zeising@freebsd.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.18
Cc: Craig Leres <leres@ee.lbl.gov>, Gerald Pfeifer <gerald@pfeifer.com>,
 Martin Matuska <mm@freebsd.org>, freebsd-ports@freebsd.org,
 Joerg Wunsch <joerg@freebsd.org>
X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18
Precedence: list
List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD <freebsd-ports.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/options/freebsd-ports>,
 <mailto:freebsd-ports-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-ports/>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-ports@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-ports-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports>,
 <mailto:freebsd-ports-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 12 May 2014 00:04:46 -0000

On Sun, May 11, 2014 at 5:41 PM, Geoff Speicher
<geoff@sea-incorporated.com>wrote:

> Actually, I have a question about ports/184327. This bug report asserts
> that ansidecl.h is an internal file necessary only to build the GNU
> toolchain and should not be installed by devel/binutils. However, binutils
> also installs bfd.h which happens to include ansidecl.h (at least, it does
> in v2.24). Therefore, the installed bfd.h is broken. This fact either
> contradicts the original assertion that ansidecl.h should not be installed,
> or else it implies that bfd.h should not be installed either.
>

There was a third possibility that I had overlooked, and appears to be a
decent compromise: bfd.h doesn't actually need to directly include
ansidecl.h for anything that I can see, so if we patch the port to remove
the include directive then bfd.h is no longer broken and ports/184327 is
also satisfied. Any objections to this?