Many thanks!
From: Tijl Coosemans
Subject: Re: libc++ vs. libstdc++ usage in the ports tree
Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2013 14:47:23 +0100
> On Thu, 12 Dec 2013 17:12:04 -0800 Steve Kargl wrote:
>> I see the octave port is still broken.
>>
>> After a clean install on my self, r
On Fri, Dec 13, 2013 at 02:47:23PM +0100, Tijl Coosemans wrote:
> On Thu, 12 Dec 2013 17:12:04 -0800 Steve Kargl wrote:
> > I see the octave port is still broken.
> >
> > After a clean install on my self, removing all installed ports,
> > reverting my local chnages in /usr/pors, and rebuilding al
On Fri, 13 Dec 2013 15:49:19 +0100 Jan Henrik Sylvester wrote:
> On 12/13/2013 14:47, Tijl Coosemans wrote:
>> On Thu, 12 Dec 2013 17:12:04 -0800 Steve Kargl wrote:
>>> I see the octave port is still broken.
>>>
>>> After a clean install on my self, removing all installed ports,
>>> reverting my l
On 12/13/2013 14:47, Tijl Coosemans wrote:
> On Thu, 12 Dec 2013 17:12:04 -0800 Steve Kargl wrote:
>> I see the octave port is still broken.
>>
>> After a clean install on my self, removing all installed ports,
>> reverting my local chnages in /usr/pors, and rebuilding all ports,
>> I'm see the or
On Thu, 12 Dec 2013 17:12:04 -0800 Steve Kargl wrote:
> I see the octave port is still broken.
>
> After a clean install on my self, removing all installed ports,
> reverting my local chnages in /usr/pors, and rebuilding all ports,
> I'm see the original problem.
>
> % octave
> Segmentation faul
Hi all
Does anybody please commit the patch? My FreeBSD machine is down due to power
outage
for next week. Also I'll be very busy in the next week.
Best,
Nakata Maho
From: Steve Kargl
Subject: Re: libc++ vs. libstdc++ usage in the ports tree
Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2013 17:12:04 -0800
>
Please commit (Approved by: portmgr(bapt)) if needed
regards,
Bapt
On Sun, Dec 01, 2013 at 03:06:40PM +0100, Tijl Coosemans wrote:
> On Wed, 27 Nov 2013 20:45:56 +0100 Tijl Coosemans wrote:
> > On Wed, 27 Nov 2013 19:31:44 +0100 Jan Henrik Sylvester wrote:
> >> Trying to migrate to 10, I would li
On Sun, Dec 01, 2013 at 03:06:40PM +0100, Tijl Coosemans wrote:
> On Wed, 27 Nov 2013 20:45:56 +0100 Tijl Coosemans wrote:
> > On Wed, 27 Nov 2013 19:31:44 +0100 Jan Henrik Sylvester wrote:
> >> Trying to migrate to 10, I would like to keep octave. Have you found
> >> anything new? Having build the
On 12/04/2013 00:23, Tijl Coosemans wrote:
> On Tue, 03 Dec 2013 22:37:34 +0100 Jan Henrik Sylvester wrote:
>> On 12/03/2013 21:54, Tijl Coosemans wrote:
>>> On Tue, 03 Dec 2013 21:26:18 +0100 Jan Henrik Sylvester wrote:
On 12/01/2013 15:06, Tijl Coosemans wrote:
> The tests were successfu
On Tue, 03 Dec 2013 22:37:34 +0100 Jan Henrik Sylvester wrote:
> On 12/03/2013 21:54, Tijl Coosemans wrote:
>> On Tue, 03 Dec 2013 21:26:18 +0100 Jan Henrik Sylvester wrote:
>>> On 12/01/2013 15:06, Tijl Coosemans wrote:
The tests were successful:
https://redports.org/buildarchive/2013120
On 12/03/2013 21:54, Tijl Coosemans wrote:
> On Tue, 03 Dec 2013 21:26:18 +0100 Jan Henrik Sylvester wrote:
>> On 12/01/2013 15:06, Tijl Coosemans wrote:
>>> On Wed, 27 Nov 2013 20:45:56 +0100 Tijl Coosemans wrote:
On Wed, 27 Nov 2013 19:31:44 +0100 Jan Henrik Sylvester wrote:
> Trying to
On Tue, 03 Dec 2013 21:26:18 +0100 Jan Henrik Sylvester wrote:
> On 12/01/2013 15:06, Tijl Coosemans wrote:
> > On Wed, 27 Nov 2013 20:45:56 +0100 Tijl Coosemans wrote:
> >> On Wed, 27 Nov 2013 19:31:44 +0100 Jan Henrik Sylvester wrote:
> >>> Trying to migrate to 10, I would like to keep octave. Ha
On 12/01/2013 15:06, Tijl Coosemans wrote:
> On Wed, 27 Nov 2013 20:45:56 +0100 Tijl Coosemans wrote:
>> On Wed, 27 Nov 2013 19:31:44 +0100 Jan Henrik Sylvester wrote:
>>> Trying to migrate to 10, I would like to keep octave. Have you found
>>> anything new? Having build the port and all dependenci
On Sun, Dec 1, 2013 at 3:06 PM, Tijl Coosemans wrote:
> On Wed, 27 Nov 2013 20:45:56 +0100 Tijl Coosemans wrote:
>> On Wed, 27 Nov 2013 19:31:44 +0100 Jan Henrik Sylvester wrote:
>>> Trying to migrate to 10, I would like to keep octave. Have you found
>>> anything new? Having build the port and al
On Wed, 27 Nov 2013 20:45:56 +0100 Tijl Coosemans wrote:
> On Wed, 27 Nov 2013 19:31:44 +0100 Jan Henrik Sylvester wrote:
>> Trying to migrate to 10, I would like to keep octave. Have you found
>> anything new? Having build the port and all dependencies with standard
>> options, octave is segfaulti
Hmm thanks for discussion.
I'll install and test FBSD 10 in this weekend.
thanks
Nakata Maho
From: Steve Kargl
Subject: Re: Re: libc++ vs. libstdc++ usage in the ports tree
Date: Wed, 27 Nov 2013 10:43:02 -0800
> On Wed, Nov 27, 2013 at 07:31:44PM +0100, Jan Henrik Sylvester wrote:
>
On Wed, 27 Nov 2013 19:31:44 +0100 Jan Henrik Sylvester wrote:
> Trying to migrate to 10, I would like to keep octave. Have you found
> anything new? Having build the port and all dependencies with standard
> options, octave is segfaulting for me, too. Anyhow, I can run octave with:
>
> env LD_PRE
On 11/14/2013 15:45, Steve Kargl wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 14, 2013 at 09:54:52AM +, David Chisnall wrote:
>> On 13 Nov 2013, at 19:40, Dimitry Andric wrote:
>>
>>> On the other hand, different C++ standard libraries simply cannot be
>>> mixed. The internal implementations are usually completely d
On Wed, Nov 27, 2013 at 07:31:44PM +0100, Jan Henrik Sylvester wrote:
> On 11/14/2013 15:45, Steve Kargl wrote:
> >
> > And in practice, it is broken.
> >
> > http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-current/2013-November/046565.html
> >
> > QED
>
> Trying to migrate to 10, I would like to ke
On Thu, Nov 14, 2013 at 09:54:52AM +, David Chisnall wrote:
> On 13 Nov 2013, at 19:40, Dimitry Andric wrote:
>
> > On the other hand, different C++ standard libraries simply cannot be
> > mixed. The internal implementations are usually completely different.
> > This is not really news at al
Am 14.11.2013 10:54 (UTC+1) schrieb David Chisnall:
> On 13 Nov 2013, at 19:40, Dimitry Andric wrote:
>
>> On the other hand, different C++ standard libraries simply cannot be
>> mixed. The internal implementations are usually completely different.
>> This is not really news at all, certainly no
On 13 Nov 2013, at 19:40, Dimitry Andric wrote:
> On the other hand, different C++ standard libraries simply cannot be
> mixed. The internal implementations are usually completely different.
> This is not really news at all, certainly not to the ports people. :-)
That said, it should still be p
On 13 Nov 2013, at 19:51, Andriy Gapon wrote:
> on 13/11/2013 19:52 Ryan Stone said the following:
>> In my experience libstdc++ does not have good ABI stability between versions
>
> In my experience it does.
> In either case compatibility between different versions of relatively modern
> libstdc
on 13/11/2013 19:52 Ryan Stone said the following:
> In my experience libstdc++ does not have good ABI stability between versions
In my experience it does.
In either case compatibility between different versions of relatively modern
libstdc++ version is no doubt much better than between libstdc++
On Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 12:52:16PM -0500, Ryan Stone wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 11:31 AM, Marcus von Appen wrote:
> > This brings up another point into which I am running with the previously
> > discussed blender issue.
> >
> > Let's assume port A_defcompiler does not specify a compiler and
On Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 11:31 AM, Marcus von Appen wrote:
> This brings up another point into which I am running with the previously
> discussed blender issue.
>
> Let's assume port A_defcompiler does not specify a compiler and c++ lib, it
> will default to libc++ and clang++ on 10.x or newer, cor
https://wiki.freebsd.org/NewC++Stack says things about linking against
both libc++ and libstdc++ , do they still apply?
Best regards
Andreas
___
freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current
To unsubsc
27 matches
Mail list logo
