devel/binutils and devel/gnulibiberty version mismatch

[Geoff Speicher]

Bringing in other parties for feedback, based on their mention in the
binutils commit (svn link below).

On Thu, May 8, 2014 at 8:41 AM, Geoff Speicher
<geoff at sea-incorporated.com>wrote:

> On Wed, May 7, 2014 at 12:30 PM, Geoff Speicher <
> geoff at sea-incorporated.com> wrote:
>
>> On Wed, May 7, 2014 at 12:05 PM, Geoff Speicher <
>> geoff at sea-incorporated.com> wrote:
>>
>>> devel/binutils is at version 2.24, and as of 16-Dec-2013 no longer
>>> installs libiberty [1], but does install libbfd, which gets linked against
>>> the copy of libiberty (v2.24) in the build tree.
>>>
>>> To link an application against libbfd from devel/binutils, one must
>>> install devel/gnulibiberty to resolve the missing symbols, but that port
>>> uses libiberty from binutils v2.19.1 which doesn't contain all the symbols
>>> from v2.24 (e.g. filename_ncmp at a minimum).
>>>
>>> There is a separate devel/libbfd port that matches the version in
>>> devel/gnulibiberty but if your port requires ${LOCALBASE}/libbfd.a and
>>> devel/gnulibiberty as build dependencies, and you already have
>>> devel/binutils installed, then your port will fail when linking.
>>>
>>> Should I just mark the port as conflicting with devel/binutils or is
>>> there a better workaround for this?
>>>
>>> [1] http://svnweb.freebsd.org/ports?view=revision&revision=336642
>>>
>>
>> Sorry for responding to myself, but it gets worse: the port I'm working
>> on requires gcc from ports (at least on FreeBSD 8.4, because it needs a
>> c++11 compiler), which depends on devel/binutils, so I can't conflict with
>> binutils or else I don't have a compiler.
>>
>> Is there any reason why devel/libbfd and devel/gnulibiberty shouldn't be
>> upgraded to v2.24?
>>
>>
> Joerg, maintainer of devel/libbfd and devel/gnulibiberty (and cc'ed on
> this response), and I have come to the conclusion that these two ports
> should simply be removed in favor of devel/binutils (maintained by Martin,
> also cc'ed). Until recently, only four ports required libbfd and/or
> gnulibiberty: devel/avarice <https://www.freshports.org/devel/avarice/>,
> emulators/skyeye <https://www.freshports.org/emulators/skyeye/>,
> devel/fpc-bfd <https://www.freshports.org/devel/fpc-bfd/>, and
> archivers/tardy <https://www.freshports.org/archivers/tardy/>. Joerg
> originally created the ports for libbfd and gnulibiberty to support his
> port of devel/avarice, but that no longer needs them after the last upgrade
> so he just dropped the dependency<http://svnweb.freebsd.org/ports?view=revision&revision=353276>leaving only three dependent ports, which can be changed to depend on
> devel/binutils <https://www.freshports.org/devel/binutils/> instead.
>
> Martin/Joerg, would the two of you be willing and able to coordinate to
> change binutils so that it installs libiberty.a (and headers) again,
> replace the dependencies for those three remaining ports, and remove the
> two ports that are no longer needed? Let me know if there is anything I can
> do to help.
>
> Geoff
>