tomcat55 port on AMD64

[Frank Laszlo]

Boris Samorodov wrote:
> On Thu, 11 May 2006 13:33:28 -0400 Frank Laszlo wrote:
>   
>> Boris Samorodov wrote:
>>     
>>> On Thu, 11 May 2006 13:08:19 -0400 Frank Laszlo wrote:
>>>       
>>>> Boris Samorodov wrote:
>>>>         
>>>>> On Thu, 11 May 2006 12:03:11 -0400 Frank Laszlo wrote:
>>>>>       
>>>>>           
>>>>>> I submitted a patch[1] to fix this issue some time ago, It has to do
>>>>>> with the way linux ports handle ARCH, since the linux emulation port
>>>>>> doesn't work on amd64, its forced to use i386 rpm's. Unfortunately my
>>>>>> efforts were shun by a brick wall, and no changes were made to address
>>>>>> this. I am going to repeat this one more time, ARCH should NEVER be
>>>>>> overwritten, here is yet another example of why.
>>>>>> [1]http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=ports/91911
>>>>>>         
>>>>>>             
>>>>> Seems that this problem shouldn't exist since updating of the port to
>>>>> use new bsd.linux-rpm.mk.
>>>>>       
>>>>>           
>>>> You would think so, but the fact of the matter is, ARCH should be a
>>>> READONLY variable. It is relied upon heavily in the ports framework and
>>>> shouldn't be changed, ever. Why we don't just use another variable name
>>>> to do the trickery is what I am wondering.
>>>>         
>>> Argh, yes. You are right. It do have problems with current default
>>> port linux_base-8. I'm using linux_base-fc3 for a long time and get
>>> used to it too much.
>>>       
>
>   
>> It looks like linux_base-fc3 is basically doing what my patch was
>> intended for, renaming the poor use of ARCH to something else
>> (LINUX_RPM_ARCH) so that we are not overwriting such an important
>> variable. But it does still have this for some reason:
>>     
>
>   
>> .if (${ARCH} == "amd64")
>> LATEST_LINK:=           ${LATEST_LINK:C/linux/linux32/}
>> ARCH=                   i386
>> .endif
>>     
>
>   
>> I'm not really sure what purpose that serves, as ARCH isn't used
>> anywhere in the Makefile. perhaps I am missing something from
>> bsd.linux-rpm.mk.
>>     
>
> I think that it is intended to use with the packages. As we discussed
> earlier, there is now native linux on AMD. Hence, one should fetch and
> install those for i386.
>
>
> WBR
>   

You mean "there is *not* native linux on AMD." correct?

__________________________________________________
Frank Laszlo
System Administrator
The VonOstin Group
Email:  laszlof at tvog.net
WWW:    http://www.vonostingroup.com
Mobile: 248-863-7584