From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Aug 6 07:51:41 2012 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Received: from mx2.freebsd.org (mx2.freebsd.org [69.147.83.53]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 832BD1065672 for ; Mon, 6 Aug 2012 07:51:41 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from dougb@FreeBSD.org) Received: from opti.dougb.net (hub.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::36]) by mx2.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DD98714DE4D; Mon, 6 Aug 2012 07:51:40 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <501F778C.5040203@FreeBSD.org> Date: Mon, 06 Aug 2012 00:51:40 -0700 From: Doug Barton Organization: http://SupersetSolutions.com/ User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; FreeBSD amd64; rv:14.0) Gecko/20120728 Thunderbird/14.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: bf1783@gmail.com References: <5015D122.4040608@FreeBSD.org> <501F40DB.900@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: X-Enigmail-Version: 1.4.2 OpenPGP: id=1A1ABC84 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org, Gerald Pfeifer , "b. f." , Kevin Oberman Subject: Re: lang/gcc46 X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 06 Aug 2012 07:51:41 -0000 On 08/06/2012 00:30, b. f. wrote: > On 8/6/12, Doug Barton wrote: >> On 07/31/2012 08:57, Gerald Pfeifer wrote: >>> On Sun, 29 Jul 2012, Doug Barton wrote: > > Sure, whatever. >> Just to be clear, you compile stuff with gcc 4.6, that is linked against >> libgcc, and then you update to 4.7, with a new libgcc, and everything >> still works? If so, that's great, I'm glad to hear that it's not a problem. > > For the most part, yes. In my mind, this isn't good enough. But I'm not in charge of anything. :) > I think Gerald was referring to Bapt's plan to make it easier to make > multiple packages from a single port, so that those who used packages > exclusively could install a package consisting of only the runtime > support libraries, rather than the whole compiler suite. Universal support for that is years away, minimum. > I had > patches to do this even without pkgng, but it made things a little > more complicated, and didn't seem to be a high priority, so I didn't > pursue it. If people feel that it is important, I could work with > Gerald to revive that, or use a knob like that of ports/155408 with > static linking to allow users to remove the runtime dependency for a > lot of software, at the cost of some added overhead from redundancies. Making this change now would benefit a lot of people, now. Doug -- I am only one, but I am one. I cannot do everything, but I can do something. And I will not let what I cannot do interfere with what I can do. -- Edward Everett Hale, (1822 - 1909)