Re: 10-CURRENT && ports/security/p11-kit

On 11/04/11 20:35, Matthias Apitz wrote:
> El día Friday, November 04, 2011 a las 08:19:12PM +0100, Armin Pirkovitsch escribió:
>
>>> ports/security/p11-kit (requested by ports/graphics/evince via gnome)
>>> does not build:
>>>
>>
>> Just wondering - have you looked at UPDATING? - especially:
>>
>> 20110928:
>>     AFFECTS: users of 10-current
>>     AUTHOR: eadler_at_FreeBSD.org
>>
>>     There are known issues installing ports on FreeBSD 10+ due to
>>     bogus assumptions by various build scripts. This will not be fixed
>>     until 9-RELEASE is released.
>> ...
>
> I have read this and I have in /etc/make.conf the following lines:
>
> # From: "b. f."<bf1783_at_googlemail.com>
> # To: freebsd-ports_at_freebsd.org, freebsd-current_at_freebsd.org
> # Date: Thu, 3 Nov 2011 13:42:50 -0400
> #
> # No, it is not the same.  You can either masquerade, by setting UNAME_r
> # and OSVERSION, or by editing the headers and scripts that define them;
> # or you can use WITH_FBSD10_FIX for ports that define HAS_CONFIGURE
> # (which is implied by USE_AUTOTOOLS and GNU_CONFIGURE).  Right now the
> # masquerading is probably safer, because there are some problems with
> # the fix that are still being resolved -- and a few ports that may fail
> # despite the fix.  But of course if you help to test without
> # masquerading, these problems will be resolved sooner.
> #
> WITH_FBSD10_FIX=1
>
> and most of the ports I'm using are compiling now; the port mentioned
> here does not (not even with UNAME_r) and I wanted to bring this to the
> attention of the maintainer and others;

Would have been useful if you had written that in the first place I guess...