Reasons for 64-bTT & DHCP import

[Kris Kennaway]

On Tue, Mar 16, 2004 at 09:34:30PM -0500, Garance A Drosihn wrote:
> At 5:33 PM +0100 3/15/04, Dag-Erling Sm?rgrav wrote:
> >Marcel Moolenaar <marcel at xcllnt.net> writes:
> >> I don't think there are specific reasons not to upgrade.
> >
> >I have one: the version in the base system is the exact same as
> >that in the ports tree, and it's broken beyond belief on 64-bit
> >systems.  I posted a patch to this list a few weeks ago for this
> >specific issue, but there are probably other, more deeply hidden
> >ones.
> 
> Hmm.  The version in ports seemed to work fairly reliably in
> my limited testing.  The version in the base system almost never
> worked for me, so I assumed they were different.
> 
> Reminder: I have not been looking into the problems with dhcp
> vs 64-bTT.  I hope someone else is...

It's possible the base system version has an incorrect configuration
file; these are typically generated statically by the person who does
the import, so they can sometimes become stale when new versions are
imported, or perhaps a sparc64 version was never imported in the first
place.

Compare any config.h files and the like from the base system version,
with what is generated by a build of the port.

Kris
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 187 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-sparc64/attachments/20040316/44570375/attachment.bin