CURRENT: /usr/ports/x11/nvidia-driver-7184 build failure.

[John Nielsen]

On Wednesday 28 March 2007, Kris Glynn wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On bootup I was being warned that the Nvidia driver I was using would
> not work with my card (Geforce 256) and to install the legacy drivers
> (7184)
>
> I then proceeded to build the following
> /usr/ports/x11/nvidia-driver-7184 but received this build error..
>
> cc -O2 -fno-strict-aliasing -pipe -DNV_MAJOR_VERSION=1
> -DNV_MINOR_VERSION=0 -DNV_PATCHLEVEL=7184 -DNVCPU_X86 -DNV_BSD
> -DNV_INT64_OK -DNV_UNIX -D__KERNEL__ -UDEBUG -U_DEBUG -DNDEBUG -O
> -fno-common -fno-unit-at-a-time -minline-all-stringops -Werror -D_KERNEL
> -DKLD_MODULE -std=c99 -nostdinc -I-  -I/src -I. -I@ -I@/contrib/altq
> -finline-limit=8000 --param inline-unit-growth=100 --param
> large-function-growth=1000 -fno-common  -mno-align-long-strings
> -mpreferred-stack-boundary=2  -mno-mmx -mno-3dnow -mno-sse -mno-sse2
> -mno-sse3 -ffreestanding -Wall -Wredundant-decls -Wnested-externs
> -Wstrict-prototypes  -Wmissing-prototypes -Wpointer-arith -Winline
> -Wcast-qual  -Wundef -fformat-extensions -c nvidia_pci.c
> nvidia_pci.c: In function `nvidia_pci_setup_intr':
> nvidia_pci.c:50: warning: passing arg 4 of `bus_setup_intr' from
> incompatible pointer type
> nvidia_pci.c:50: warning: passing arg 5 of `bus_setup_intr' from
> incompatible pointer type
> nvidia_pci.c:50: error: too few arguments to function `bus_setup_intr'
> *** Error code 1
> Stop in
> /usr/ports/x11/nvidia-driver-7184/work/NVIDIA-FreeBSD-x86-1.0-7184/src.
> *** Error code 1
> Stop in
> /usr/ports/x11/nvidia-driver-7184/work/NVIDIA-FreeBSD-x86-1.0-7184.
> *** Error code 1
> Stop in /usr/ports/x11/nvidia-driver-7184.
>
> Any ideas ?

I just ran in to this myself (trying to use the 9631 version of the driver). 
See:
  http://www.nvnews.net/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=87019

for an unverified patch. The poster there just supplied NULL for the missing 
(fourth) argument. That works for me (at least for compiling).. still 
trying to get the driver to behave after upgrading to -CURRENT today 
though..

I expect someone on -current would be able to comment on the API change, but 
I haven't seen this mentioned over there yet (and I haven't bothered to go 
CVS-diving myself).

JN