Date: Thu, 26 May 2005 21:30:14 +0200 (CEST) From: Gerald Pfeifer <gerald@pfeifer.com> To: David O'Brien <obrien@FreeBSD.org> Cc: cvs-ports@FreeBSD.org, NAKATA Maho <chat95@mac.com>, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org, ports-committers@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: ports/lang/gcc40 Makefile distinfo pkg-plist Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.4.62.0505262128470.25754@acrux.dbai.tuwien.ac.at> In-Reply-To: <20050523023831.GC62971@dragon.NUXI.org> References: <200505162031.j4GKVMOR038312@repoman.freebsd.org> <20050521.144236.74702484.chat95@mac.com> <Pine.BSF.4.62.0505212152420.33827@acrux.dbai.tuwien.ac.at> <20050523023831.GC62971@dragon.NUXI.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sun, 22 May 2005, David O'Brien wrote: >> However, I think we should see to use one of the regular ports in the >> future instead of having a special port just for the purpose of building >> OpenOffice.org. > At the moment gcc-ooo has some needed patches that were rejected for GCC > 3.4. So we have no choice - unless we add the patches to the gcc34 port. > I investigated doing that, but I wasn't comfortable with the changes the > patches make to add them to gcc34 for general use. Yes, in that case we shouldn't do that. However, I wonder whether it's really necessary to keep gcc-ooo as a port of its own instead of making it a child port of the main gcc34 port which carries additional patches? Alternatively, how about giving the gcc40 port a try? Gerald
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.4.62.0505262128470.25754>