Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Thu, 26 Feb 2004 12:47:17 -0800
From:      Kris Kennaway <kris@obsecurity.org>
To:        Alexey Dokuchaev <danfe@nsu.ru>
Cc:        Kris Kennaway <kris@obsecurity.org>
Subject:   Re: cvs commit: ports/devel/mingw32-gcc Makefile
Message-ID:  <20040226204716.GG5915@xor.obsecurity.org>
In-Reply-To: <20040226203908.GA80665@regency.nsu.ru>
References:  <200402251130.i1PBUMuc078425@repoman.freebsd.org> <20040225182238.GA76015@xor.obsecurity.org> <20040226203908.GA80665@regency.nsu.ru>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help

--MrRUTeZlqqNo1jQ9
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Fri, Feb 27, 2004 at 02:39:08AM +0600, Alexey Dokuchaev wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 25, 2004 at 10:22:39AM -0800, Kris Kennaway wrote:
> > On Wed, Feb 25, 2004 at 03:30:22AM -0800, Lev A. Serebryakov wrote:
> > > lev         2004/02/25 03:30:22 PST
> > >=20
> > >   FreeBSD ports repository
> > >=20
> > >   Modified files:
> > >     devel/mingw32-gcc    Makefile=20
> > >   Log:
> > >     This prot WORKS on sparc64. Tested five minutes ago on panther.fr=
eebsd.org.
> >=20
> > No, it is broken on bento as stated, as you can see for yourself by
> > checking the error logs.  This means it is likely to be broken in
> > certain user environments as well.  Please attempt to understand the
> > nature of the failure instead of pretending it doesn't exist.
>=20
> Uhm, it seems that Lev encountered occasionally poped up issue of when
> port fails to build on bento, but builds/work flawlessly on "normal
> setup" box(es).  This is (was) the case with multimedia/WMxmms, for
> instance.  While problems like these should definitely be addressed at
> some point (whether by fixing bento build farm setup or implementing
> some workaround in the port itself), marking such ports IGNORE instead
> of BROKEN seems like a reasonable band-aid for now.

Lev and I are addressing this off-list, but as I mentioned in my
original email the port maintainer should attempt to understand the
nature of the failure on bento before writing it off as "it must be a
bug with bento".

More often than not these problems are due to an unconsidered
difference between the maintainer's system and bento, which would be
seen in an analogous real-world environment.

Kris

--MrRUTeZlqqNo1jQ9
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
Content-Disposition: inline

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (FreeBSD)

iD8DBQFAPltUWry0BWjoQKURAshGAKCqRzt7dQNWWH+CkNSGqAxvF8gdkACeOUZj
RigE1QMZLcMEcXBZGi4bF38=
=XkLc
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--MrRUTeZlqqNo1jQ9--



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20040226204716.GG5915>