[current tinderbox] failure on ...all...

[David O'Brien]

On Mon, Jun 13, 2005 at 09:19:36AM +0200, Bjrn Knig wrote:
> David O'Brien wrote:
> >I could say that about tons of other ports.  The gcc28 port works fine,
> >and I don't see what is wrong with the patch I supplied.  gcc28 is still
> >the fastest compiler (in terms of compiler speed) we have on FreeBSD.  It
> >is still useful.
> 
> For what is it useful? It can't compile C++ code,

Funny for me, I just compiled some C++ code (using catch-throw)
exceptions and it ran fine.

> it has a lack of 
> standard conformance, gcc295 isn't quite worse and the utility ccache is 
> a good choice you if you need fast recompilation.

Then for you, use gcc295.  But there is C++ code and C code that gcc295
won't compile.  That is why I keep gcc28 around.  I don't see why the
existence of gcc28 is a hardship for you.  I've even set NO_CDROM to not
be a burden for you.  It builds in 1 minute 30 seconds on my machine, so
its not a burden on the package cluster either.
 
-- 
-- David  (obrien at FreeBSD.org)