Fwd: [Bug 89315] Add build files for FreeBSD (x86 and AMD64)

[Vizion]

As the freebsd-eclipse at freebsd.org mailing list is new I forwarded a copy of 
this to freebsd-java at freebsd.org. If anyone wishes to discuss (or any eclipse 
specific issues) this will they please do so on the freebsd-eclipse mailing 
list

Thanks


----------  Forwarded Message  ----------

Subject: [Bug 89315] Add build files for FreeBSD (x86 and AMD64)
Date: Monday 29 August 2005 12:04
From: bugzilla-daemon at eclipse.org
To: vizion at vizion.occoxmail.com

https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=89315





------- Additional Comments From bbiggs at ca.ibm.com  2005-08-29 15:04 -------
I intend to apply the patches to the launcher and SWT, but I have one
 question. I've been worried about the use of "libgtk-x11-2.0.so.0" vs
 "libgtk-x11-2.0.so" on *BSD vs Linux.  For shared libraries, the first
 number is the major version number, and an unversioned .so link is supposed
 to point at the current development version (it's what -l uses).  We can't
 dlopen the .so on every platform because doesn't always exist.  Under many
 Linux distributions, the .so symbolic link only exists in the -devel
 package.

I have heard that the library version weirdness on FreeBSD is due to a
 libtool bug, and is fixed by an "ltverhack" script at some point, but I have
 not been able to verify this.

Anyway, back to the point, is there a sane #ifdef I can protect this around,
 or should I just use the FREEBSD one you define in the makefile?



------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are a voter for the bug, or are watching someone who is.

-------------------------------------------------------

-- 
40 yrs navigating and computing in blue waters.
English Owner & Captain of British Registered 60' bluewater Ketch S/V Taurus.
 Currently in San Diego, CA. Sailing bound for Europe via Panama Canal after 
completing engineroom refit.