From owner-freebsd-ports-bugs@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Feb 5 00:50:01 2013 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports-bugs@smarthost.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9C5CE429 for ; Tue, 5 Feb 2013 00:50:01 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from gnats@FreeBSD.org) Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (freefall.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206c::16:87]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 89592BFE for ; Tue, 5 Feb 2013 00:50:01 +0000 (UTC) Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.14.6/8.14.6) with ESMTP id r150o0fO094055 for ; Tue, 5 Feb 2013 00:50:00 GMT (envelope-from gnats@freefall.freebsd.org) Received: (from gnats@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.14.6/8.14.6/Submit) id r150o0ge094053; Tue, 5 Feb 2013 00:50:00 GMT (envelope-from gnats) Date: Tue, 5 Feb 2013 00:50:00 GMT Message-Id: <201302050050.r150o0ge094053@freefall.freebsd.org> To: freebsd-ports-bugs@FreeBSD.org Cc: From: Rodrigo OSORIO Subject: Re: ports/175733: devel/libatomic_ops: Segmentation fault : install -o root -g wheel -m 444 atomic_ops/sysdeps/ibmc/powerpc.h '/usr/local/include//atomic_ops/sysdeps/ibmc' X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports-bugs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list Reply-To: Rodrigo OSORIO List-Id: Ports bug reports List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 05 Feb 2013 00:50:01 -0000 The following reply was made to PR ports/175733; it has been noted by GNATS. From: Rodrigo OSORIO To: bug-followup@FreeBSD.org Cc: Edwin Groothuis , ohartman@zedat.fu-berlin.de Subject: Re: ports/175733: devel/libatomic_ops: Segmentation fault : install -o root -g wheel -m 444 atomic_ops/sysdeps/ibmc/powerpc.h '/usr/local/include//atomic_ops/sysdeps/ibmc' Date: Tue, 05 Feb 2013 01:42:48 +0100 Hi Olivier, I analyze the Pr you submit with different configurations and using the most common releases and I finally come to the conclusion the problem was caused by the kernel version you are using (use clang or gcc doesn't affect the result). As said before I was able to reproduce the problem in a virtualbox with a current kernel and you know 'current' is not really known for his stability, specially so far from the next release cycle. So, I believe spending time investigating this issues is not really relevant, so if you don't have very good reasons to run applications out of a "production ready" environment, I suggest edwin can close this issue as is. Best regards, - rodrigo