Please test your commits
Steve Kargl
sgk at troutmask.apl.washington.edu
Sun Feb 12 21:17:45 UTC 2012
On Sun, Feb 12, 2012 at 08:52:56PM +0000, Chris Rees wrote:
> On 12 Feb 2012 20:45, "Steve Kargl" <sgk at troutmask.apl.washington.edu>
> wrote:
> >
> >
> > laptop:root[252] uname -a
> > FreeBSD laptop 10.0-CURRENT FreeBSD 10.0-CURRENT #0 r230975M: Sat Feb 4
> 09:03:27 PST 2012 root at laptop:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/MOBILE i386
>
> Well, that immediately shows that this is a 10.0 error, which means it's
> almost certainly due to freebsd1* being matched in some configure script.
>
Empirical evidence suggests that ghostscript9 developers are using
a newer version of the autotools.
laptop:root[262] find . -name configure | xargs grep -i "freebsd\[1" | more
./lcms/configure: freebsd[123].*) objformat=aout ;;
./lcms/configure: freebsd[12].*)
./lcms/configure: freebsd[123].*) objformat=aout ;;
./lcms/configure: freebsd[123].*) objformat=aout ;;
./lcms/configure: freebsd[123].*) objformat=aout ;;
./freetype/builds/unix/configure: freebsd[123].*) objformat=aout ;;
./lcms2/configure: freebsd[123].*) objformat=aout ;;
./lcms2/configure: freebsd[12].*)
./lcms2/configure: freebsd[123].*) objformat=aout ;;
laptop:root[263] find . -name configure | xargs grep -i "freebsd1" | more
./lcms/configure: freebsd1.*)
./lcms/configure:freebsd1.*)
./lcms/configure:freebsd1.*)
./lcms/configure: freebsd1.*)
./lcms/configure:freebsd1.*)
./lcms/configure: freebsd1.*)
./lcms/configure:freebsd1.*)
./freetype/builds/unix/configure: freebsd1.*)
./freetype/builds/unix/configure:freebsd1.*)
./lcms2/configure: freebsd1.*)
./lcms2/configure:freebsd1.*)
The malloc issue will not appear on amd64 because the problematic
code is
#elif !defined(__amd64__) && !defined(__APPLE__)
#define HAVE_MEMALIGN
#include <malloc.h>
#endif
with the obvious fix
#elif !defined(__amd64__) && !defined(__APPLE__) && !defined(__FreeBSD__)
#define HAVE_MEMALIGN
#include <malloc.h>
#endif
But, the 2nd issue with too many arguments in a function call is
clearly evident on amd64 because I justed test that on FreeBSD 10.
--
Steve
More information about the freebsd-ports
mailing list