Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2002 17:20:02 +0100 From: Stijn Hoop <stijn@win.tue.nl> To: Emiel Kollof <coolvibe@hackerheaven.org> Cc: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: The plot thickens (problem solved!) (was Re: More information ...) Message-ID: <20021220162002.GD23803@pcwin002.win.tue.nl> In-Reply-To: <20021220160029.GB81599@hackerheaven.org> References: <20021220013445.GA75547@hackerheaven.org> <20021220020545.GC75547@hackerheaven.org> <200212200333.04276.coolvibe@hackerheaven.org> <20021220113825.GA80454@hackerheaven.org> <20021220152828.GA81599@hackerheaven.org> <20021220153518.GC23803@pcwin002.win.tue.nl> <20021220160029.GB81599@hackerheaven.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--/WwmFnJnmDyWGHa4
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On Fri, Dec 20, 2002 at 05:00:29PM +0100, Emiel Kollof wrote:
> * Stijn Hoop (stijn@win.tue.nl) wrote:
> > On Fri, Dec 20, 2002 at 04:28:28PM +0100, Emiel Kollof wrote:
> > > Allright, who broke XFree86? Fess up! :)
> >=20
> > Nobody. I think your system is broken somehow.
>=20
> Hm weird.=20
Yes, sure.
> > > After removing _every_ trace of X-related stuff off of my system, X j=
ust=20
> > > completely fails to build. XFree86-4-libraries builds fine, but then =
when=20
> > > building the XFree86-4-clients it bombs, same pthread/XthrStub relate=
d=20
> > > error I have been meandering about all day.
> >=20
> > And sent 20 mails in the process.
>=20
> Yes, because nobody gave me any feedback or reports in any form. Which
> (for me at least) results in me digging and reporting anything I find.
> At least the archives of this mailing list will be aware of my attempts
> to find a workaround for this problem. It might help other people.
Of course. But consolidated into one email it wouldn't have flooded my inbox
this much...
> > > I stronly suspect that the patch-UIThrStubs.c in the X-4-libs port mu=
st
> > > be bogus. After removing it the problems were gone.
> >=20
> > It isn't. At least not on my system.
>=20
> The funny thing is (and it's also part of why I was delving so deeply)
> that a related issue was in the archives. Also, needing -pthread for
> *every* X11 app seemed a bit, well, weird to me.
Yes it was a problem somewhere in the timeline of the XFree port. Which
is why I didn't exclude the problem being in the ports collection.
> Later attempts _without_ optimalisations resulted in the same errors. I
> did use portupgrade -fR, and I _do_ keep a clean and tidy system. I
> cvsup religiously, rebuild world/kernel when needed, and read UPDATING=20
> etc. etc. There's absolutely no reason why this couldn't have affected=20
> someone else as well. Even from a clean environment (everything X related=
=20
> removed, as in pkg_delete all of X and nuking what's left as in rm -rf
> /usr/X11R6) this glitch occured *again*. Odd, no?=20
>
> Oh, I must've recompiled the whole (and parts) of X like 10 times today. =
I=20
> also rebuild world and kernel again just to make sure my toolchain and=20
> evironment was pristine.
OK, that's good to know. I didn't see these facts before in your other mail=
s.
> > I can guarantee that if the XFree-4-libraries port was broken there wou=
ld
> > be much more people who have the same problem.
>=20
> I might be the first to have noticed. What if suddenly 20 more people in
> the span of the next 24 hours report that X or X apps won't build?
That's of course true, but 16 hours have passed since your first email
and noone else reports such a problem. Experience has shown that X build
problems will probably be reported more frequently here or on -ports
during that period if they affect all of the FreeBSD user group.
Or maybe everyone's on holiday of course, I don't know...
What I'm trying to say, politely, is something like 'patience, young jedi',
I think you will get more results from the lists that way. No offense
meant.
BTW, I also didn't see a response to Joe Marcus Clarke's questions:
> What ports are broken because of this? Any port which can't find
> -pthread or -lc_r on its own should have ${PTHREAD_LIBS} added to its
> LIBS configure argument. With that, there are also some thread-related
> CFLAGS that should be added. These are defined by the ports system as
> ${PTHREAD_CFLAGS}.
Except for your test program, what ports don't work? What lead you to
the initial conclusion that something is wrong with X?
--Stijn
--=20
If today is the first day of the rest of your life, what the hell was
yesterday?
--/WwmFnJnmDyWGHa4
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
Content-Disposition: inline
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (FreeBSD)
iD8DBQE+A0MyY3r/tLQmfWcRAviWAJ4iqftPRdA/qcr+stw0SAaA/PHJbQCfe/me
//ys+QHCtX7cq1NDWav69IU=
=GtBa
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--/WwmFnJnmDyWGHa4--
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20021220162002.GD23803>