From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Jan 8 23:28:48 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6A0B716A421; Tue, 8 Jan 2008 23:28:48 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from kris@FreeBSD.org) Received: from weak.local (freefall.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::28]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2BFBC13C45B; Tue, 8 Jan 2008 23:28:46 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from kris@FreeBSD.org) Message-ID: <4784072D.9040003@FreeBSD.org> Date: Wed, 09 Jan 2008 00:28:45 +0100 From: Kris Kennaway User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.9 (Macintosh/20071031) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: pav@FreeBSD.org References: <61565506@bb.ipt.ru> <4783E1C6.50001@FreeBSD.org> <95483459@bb.ipt.ru> <1199830245.74596.155.camel@ikaros.oook.cz> <63313519@bb.ipt.ru> <1199834453.74596.157.camel@ikaros.oook.cz> In-Reply-To: <1199834453.74596.157.camel@ikaros.oook.cz> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-2; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Cc: Boris Samorodov , freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.org, portmgr@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: pointyhat is building for 5.5 but claiming 8.0 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: Tue, 08 Jan 2008 23:28:48 -0000 Pav Lucistnik wrote: > Boris Samorodov píše v st 09. 01. 2008 v 02:16 +0300: >> On Tue, 08 Jan 2008 23:10:45 +0100 Pav Lucistnik wrote: >> >>>>> No, the port is using sysctl(2) to query the OS version which cannot >>>>> be wrapped. >>>> Hm, ports-mgmt/tinderbox masks it somehow... And doesn't get >>>> an error for this port. >>> The FreeBSD version inside the tinderbox is same as the host? >> OK, I found the difference. The port builds for all FreeBSD version >> except 5.x. The same is for ports-mgmt/tinderbox. Thus I think that >> there is something that was not MFS'd to 5-STABLE that causes the >> difference. >> >> For now I'm going to mark the port as IGNORE for OSVERSION < 600000. >> A question to portmgr@: Do you have any objections? > > It would be nice to know what exactly is going on in there. Yeah, I can't imagine what it would be, unless it is using uname(1) or (3) and 5.x doesn't have the environment variable overrides...but in that case hundreds of other things would break. Kris