Date: Fri, 22 Nov 2013 15:37:56 +0100 From: Michael Gmelin <freebsd@grem.de> To: andrew clarke <mail@ozzmosis.com> Cc: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: www/aria2 dependencies & lang/llvm33 build error Message-ID: <20131122153756.02e2c9d2@bsd64.grem.de> In-Reply-To: <20131122142055.GA36109@ozzmosis.com> References: <20131116132213.GA95852@ozzmosis.com> <20131117110145.GA63272@ozzmosis.com> <20131117141502.5c203a99@bsd64.grem.de> <20131122142055.GA36109@ozzmosis.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sat, 23 Nov 2013 01:20:55 +1100 andrew clarke <mail@ozzmosis.com> wrote: Slightly confused post on my part, sorry ;) > On Sun 2013-11-17 14:15:02 UTC+0100, Michael Gmelin (freebsd@grem.de) > wrote: > > > > > www/aria2 1.18.1 requires lang/clang33. Is this really > > > > necessary? Previous aria2 versions didn't require clang. > > > > > > I've now had a chance to check the aria2 sources and evidently it > > > now requires C++11 support, which I find surprising, but that's > > > progress I suppose... > > > > From a developer's standpoint this makes a lot of sense, since > > C++11 is more productive and a lot more fun to use. > > Sounds good. I just wonder about the logic behind doing that for a > minor 1.17 -> 1.18 release though. True, that's not a very friendly move. > > > I just built sudo successfully on 9.1 using system clang 3.1 and > > CXX=clang++ > > CXXFLAGS+=-std=c++11 -stdlib=libc++ > > Yeah, I have no problem building sudo with clang. The sudo code is all > C though, not C++. Well, that was supposed to be "aria2" and not "sudo" (no idea why I wrote sudo in the first place, probably multitasking when I shouldn't have). A tried it specifically because it didn't build about two weeks earlier due to being incompatible with C++11. So it went straight from not working with C++11 to requiring C++11. Good times :) > Upgrading from 8.4 to 9.2 was surprisingly painless though, so I'm not > as concerned with future upgrades. My main worry was root on ZFS, and > whether the pool would be bootable from the newer kernel. It all went > swimmingly though. Disk performance seems to have improved a little > too which is nice. Yeah, updates to 9 have been really smooth compared to previous releases (there is nothing like going from 4.11 to 5.3 :D). I have no numbers to support this, but 9.2 feels snappier to me than 9.1 - like something got "unstuck". Cheers, Michael -- Michael Gmelin
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20131122153756.02e2c9d2>