[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Multiple topics

On Mon, Apr 08, 2002 at 10:37:41PM -0600, Joel Baker wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 08, 2002 at 10:11:46PM -0400, utsl@quic.net wrote:
> > On Mon, Apr 08, 2002 at 06:54:29PM -0600, Joel Baker wrote:
> > > Two main things:
> > > 
> > > 1) FreeBSD 5.0 pre-release... does anyone know if it's GCC 3.x clean? If
> > > so, I might futz with trying to do up a chroot based on that, at some point
> > > here... unless someone else desperately wants to do it or something.
> > 
> > Kind of. I had problems building it. Ironically, I have -STABLE patched
> > to build with the Debian gcc. (3.0.4) Except the kernel, which I use the
> > FreeBSD compiler for. :(
> Interesting. It was largely the kernel I was hoping was GCC 3.x compliant.
> Guess it isn't yet. Hrrrf.

What I ran into with 5.0 was that there was a define that you set to
enable compiling with gcc 3.x, and there were some #ifdef's to make it
work. However, that define also enabled building gcc 3.x from the
FreeBSD source tree, and that failed. Looked like the changes for it
aren't quite finished merging in. That was only a week or two ago, so
I'd wait a little while yet.

> > If you're really interested in this, I can let you have my packaging
> > scripts.
> That could be useful; or I could put them up (with permission) on the
> archive...

These packages are pretty stable. I could upload source and binaries for
it, if you've got your machine taking uploads. :-)

The main trouble I've got with uploading is going through all the 
packages I've built, and sorting out which ones needed patching, if it's
still necessary, and cleaning up patches where I can. I'm getting near the
point where I should just run an autobuilder.

> > > 2) pmake (aka /usr/src/usr.bin/make) - the source tree for this on the
> > > various BSD flavors differ significantly, but all appear to share some
> > > basic level of functionality. How similar are they? I'm looking at taking
> > > over the pmake package, and wondering whether stealing just one would
> > > suffice, or whether I need to do pmake-netbsd, pmake-freebsd, pmake-openbsd
> > > (heck, maybe pmake-bsd44 for the origional BSD 4.4 version?) and allow
> > > folks to use /etc/alternatives to select what 'pmake' actually calls.
> > 
> > I needed a lot of other tools to build FreeBSD, especially the kernel,
> > so I just included BSD make into that. Debian's pmake package won't
> > build for me.
> Bug filed? Reference? I can probably arrange to ensure this, at least, gets
> fixed in the relatively near future, if so.

Hmm, no. I didn't spend much time on it. It was some libc function
missing, I think. That's usually the problem. The only reason I tried to
build it was because ash depends on it, but ash built fine with
FreeBSD's make. I had to have ash for makedev, because it won't work
with bash. So ash becomes a base package on FreeBSD, at least for 4.x. :(

At this point, I have a package I build from the FreeBSD source tree,
that contains all the programs I need to build that source. The circular
dependacy is a bit annoying, but that package solves a lot of headaches.
(Would you believe it requires the FreeBSD version of find in the


To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bsd-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org

Reply to: