lang/gcc42 on alpha

[Gerald Pfeifer]

Hi Anton,

On Tue, 8 Jul 2008, Anton Shterenlikht wrote:
> I've been using lang/gcc42 on alpha for more than a year now.
> My calculation shows that the port was updated 25 times during
> last year. Each time I upgraded the port with no problem, except
> for as failure, which happens on my i386 just the same:

thanks for the report.  This is the first feedback I got during the
more than three years that we have had NOT_FOR_ARCHS=alpha for the
newer lang/gcc ports.

> Accordingly I wonder why lang/gcc42 is still marked
> NOT_FOR_ARCHS=  alpha 
> 
> Are there other alpha users who have trouble with this port?

The original reports that triggered this change came from the FreeBSD 
Ports Build Cluster.  I did some archeology, and here is what I had sent 
to a member of the portmgr team back than in response, which resulted in 
the suggestion to use NOT_FOR_ARCHS:

  I just wasted a couple of ours bringing sparc64 back to bootstrap-land
  for GCC 4.0 and GCC 4.1 because *nobody*, not a single FreeBSD developer
  or user apparently tried to build either for many moons.  And now the
  same is starting for alpha; isn't that a waste of our time, for the sake
  of one or two enthusiasts?

I'm fine giving it a try and remove NOT_FOR_ARCHS=alpha for lang/gcc42.
If there are problems with it, I may ask you for help or put this back
in, though. ;-)  

> [I] can put NOT_FOR_ARCHS= '' in my make.conf and avoid having to edit 
> the Makefile each upgrade.

Shouldn't "cvs update" handle this gracefully and keep the change while
merging in the other updates?

Gerald
-- 
Gerald (Jerry) Pfeifer   gerald at pfeifer.com   http://www.pfeifer.com/gerald/