--R+My9LyyhiUvIEro
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

* On 2004-08-19 at 04:32 BST, grant beattie wrote:

> we already have at least two ultras running Solaris 9 running bulk
> builds full time, but certainly earlier versions of Solaris (and
> perhaps faster machines) would be most welcome.. basically, the more
> the better! :)

Indeed; I currently use around 4 machines to do various bulk builds, but
there are always more combinations that I'd like built.  For example,
I've recently been doing 64bit builds which are showing up a whole new
bunch of bugs which we can fix, but I'd like more.

Currently:

	SunOS 5.8 - SunPRO - 64bit
	SunOS 5.9 - SunPRO - 32bit
	SunOS 5.9 - gcc3.3.2 - 32bit

We've recently moved to pretty much 5.9 everywhere, so I'd especially
like to see more 6/7/8/10 stuff, as well as 64bit gcc (if possible).  I
only have the one 5.8 box to play with which needs to be sunpro/64 as
that's what is used for kits sent to other machines.  Note that due to
various issues, all of these are unprivileged, so some mksandbox builds
as root would also be appreciated (especially to help track down the
only current critical bug for solaris-pkg-people in GNATS as well as
flagging up any others).

While here, I'd like to check something.  For a load of 64bit stuff to
work, I've had to set

	LDFLAGS+=3D	-xtarget=3Dultra -xarch=3Dv9

in addition to

	C{XX}FLAGS+=3D	-xtarget=3Dultra -xarch=3Dv9

which is blatently wrong (try passing /usr/ccs/bin/ld those flags!), but
I'm not entirely sure of the Right [tm] way to do this.  The most
obvious breakage of this is bsd.prog.mk used by pkg_install-info which
completely nullifies any bulk build (incidentally I'd love to get rid of
all the bsd.*.mk compat stuff - is this a direction people would
support?)  Do we have a policy on how these variables should be handled,
so that I can get working on fixing the various packages properly (one
I've just noticed is openssl which is going to cause another whole bunch
of broken dependancies) rather than on a per-pkg basis.

Cheers,

--=20
Jonathan Perkin                                       The NetBSD Project
http://www.perkin.org.uk/                         http://www.netbsd.org/

--R+My9LyyhiUvIEro
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
Content-Disposition: inline

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (NetBSD)

iQEVAwUBQSRdmiFee6/VMqV4AQLX4ggAksRzR1SWhPYs2nZA/fcZIBIiMYu6++WQ
HFAxJFJOKTEb5k8wl+gvHxaOJwJ7yzDY6REKhUjfZtXb+mis/f9HMxA1jfuPVZ3x
cP5ndnagCcWttj1Lr4i3TL0xArgBogXlXTuxKitTH1wkbuFGAmYOAs7qD07RG76K
thPLKJGrIa6il/v0RY3fTrzepKx8EWd0oAEgeBVtLINTFBYyQYWElJrrA4z4Lh5e
+OeP3BJFzWtk/girKmsdJFzUakOWJ4u58XCb9pWMe2g6EiJdLETJRa9Ybizzg9Nc
x9fndBRzKq1WwAawFqWm8xfTRufp9mHwLqMx4bxgj1vYNVgn06d3+w==
=1/5p
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--R+My9LyyhiUvIEro--