FreeBSD ports which are currently marked broken

[David Wolfskill]

On Wed, May 21, 2008 at 03:54:50PM +0200, linimon at FreeBSD.org wrote:
> As part of an ongoing effort to reduce the number of problems in
> the FreeBSD ports system, we periodically notify users of ports
> that are marked as "broken" in their Makefiles.  In many cases
> these ports are failing to compile on some subset of the FreeBSD
> build environments.  The most common problem is that recent versions
> of -CURRENT include gcc4.2, which is much stricter than older versions.
> The next most common problem is that compiles succeed on the i386
> architecture (e.g. the common Intel PC), but fail on one or more
> of the other architectures due to assumptions about things such as
> size of various types, byte-alignment issues, and so forth.
> ....

> portname:           net-mgmt/ap-utils
> /home/linimon/portsbuild errors:       none.
> overview:           http://portsmon.FreeBSD.org/portoverview.py?category=net-mgmt&portname=ap-utils
> ...


Since I actually use that port, I thought I'd do as much of a reality
check as I can.

So I tried building it on my laptop, running:

g1-37(8.0-C)[33] uname -a
FreeBSD g1-37.catwhisker.org 8.0-CURRENT FreeBSD 8.0-CURRENT #779: Fri May 23 06:28:42 PDT 2008     root at g1-37.catwhisker.org:/common/S4/obj/usr/src/sys/CANARY  i386
g1-37(8.0-C)[34] gcc -v
Using built-in specs.
Target: i386-undermydesk-freebsd
Configured with: FreeBSD/i386 system compiler
Thread model: posix
gcc version 4.2.1 20070719  [FreeBSD]
g1-37(8.0-C)[35] 

It built without complaint; the resulting executable appears to work --
I was able to poke around in the list of allowed MAC addresses for the
AP in question, for example, and look at the wireless configuration.

Checking the above link, it appears that:

* The only arch for which there's a problem is ia64.  That build is
  marked "ok but out-of-date."

* No builds are marked "failed to build."

Also, I found no open PRs that mentioned "ap-utils."

The probability that I will have access to an ia64 machine for
testing such things is not especially high -- and the probability
that I'll own one is within epsilon of zero.  The latter also applies
to other tier-1 architectures than i386 (and possibly amd64).

So:

* Is the "BROKEN: Broken with gcc 4.2" actually warranted?

* What (else) can I do to help?

* Is there an alternative method for configuring an Atmel-based AP
  (under FreeBSD)?

Peace,
david
-- 
David H. Wolfskill				david at catwhisker.org
I submit that "conspiracy" would be an appropriate collective noun for cats.

See http://www.catwhisker.org/~david/publickey.gpg for my public key.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 195 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-ports/attachments/20080525/4a4d6822/attachment.pgp