[Bug 220714] devel/boost-all: Update to 1.65 (currently beta)

[bugzilla-noreply at freebsd.org]

https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=220714

--- Comment #8 from Jan Beich <jbeich at FreeBSD.org> ---
(In reply to Justin Hibbits from comment #5)
> Kicked off a poudriere build of devel/boost-all now, for ppc64

Can you enable PYTHON option or just build devel/boost-python-libs later? The
specific port rarely caused issues in the past.

(In reply to Mark Millard from comment #6)
Thanks for useful questions.

> A) a system gcc 4.2.1 based build?

Mainly this one.

> B) some modern lang/gcc* based build(s)?

After bug 218788 non-x86/non-arm platforms may end up using lang/gcc5 when
building boost-libs in C++11 mode. For testing try the following:

devel/boost-all/compiled.mk:
-USES+=         compiler:features
+USES+=         compiler:c++11-lib
+USE_CXXSTD=    c++11

> D) an experimental system-clang-4 based build?

Have you tried if C++ exceptions work on /branches/clang500-import? If "no"
then let's focus on GCC for now.

> Is libcxxrt common to all of the options?

<unwind.h> comes from either libcxxrt (if clang/libc++ is enabled) or GCC.
_Unwind_Backtrace() comes from either LLVM libunwind or GCC.

However, GCC 4.2 in base may lack both <unwind.h> and _Unwind_Backtrace().
Whether Boost build is smart to figure this out is an open question. ;)

> @) 32-bit FreeBSD vs. 64-bit FreeBSD?

Only 64-bit would be fine but each Boost update has medium risk of breaking on
some architecture. For one, bug 199601 skipped several versions and ended up
losing sparc64 support.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.