ports/73685 - anyone interested?

[Alexander Nedotsukov]

Joe Kelsey wrote:

>On Wed, 2004-11-10 at 11:03 +0900, Alexander Nedotsukov wrote:
>  
>
>>Joe Kelsey wrote:
>>
>>    
>>
>>>Yesterday, I submitted ports/73685 about problems with all *mm ports
>>>(gtkmm, vfsmm, etc.)  I cannot finish my 2.8 upgrade due to inability to
>>>compile these ports.
>>>
>>>This is a critical and high priority problem.
>>>
>>>The problem appears to relate to attempting to use g++34 to compile the
>>>ports.  Should it really use g++34 on a 4.10 system?
>>>
>>>Anyone who has any ideas, please let me know.  I cannot think of where
>>>to go from here.
>>> 
>>>
>>>      
>>>
>>Forgot to CC here. For anyone interested please see PR folowup.
>>    
>>
>
>The answer posted to the PR did not help in the slightest.
>
>While waiting in vain for someone to help with this problem which has
>bothered me for at least two weeks, I finally stumbled around with more
>or less "random" attempts to solve the problem by working backward from
>gtkmm until I finally did
>
>portupgrade -f libsigc++
>
>which actually ended up replacing three different versions of libsigc++,
>including the miscompiled 2.0 version.
>
>Of course the snide remark made in the PR about "use portupgrade" really
>makes me mad because it simply indicates that the responder did not even
>attempt to read the actual PR which clearly indicates use of
>portupgrade.
>  
>
To be honest responder gave you clear (as he used to think) advice "Use 
portupgrade -f on each port which triggers link error like in PR." and 
showed you first step. This way you was supposed to step through glibmm 
-> libsigc++ updates.