"OBATA Akio" <obata%lins.jp@localhost> writes: > On Wed, 04 Jun 2014 21:47:35 +0900, Greg Troxel <gdt%ir.bbn.com@localhost> > wrote: >> x11/gtk3 406 >> pkgsrc-users%NetBSD.org@localhost > > Builtin X11 is too old for gtk3. >> devel/boost-libs 325 >> pkgsrc-users%NetBSD.org@localhost > > Builtin GCC is too old? (Thanks John also for the confirming comments.) So it seems like we have two separate problems. 1) netbsd-5 x11 is crufty Builtin x11 on netbsd-5 is too old for a number of things, We don't really have enough cycles to keep this working; until I raised the issue about freetype2 last time it had been broken a long time. Not really germane to pkgsrc, but if NetBSD 7 had been released we would ignore netbsd-5. NetBSD 5 was released over 5 years ago. > Should we allow partial packages with builtin X11, or should we set > required version (BUILDLINK_API_DEPENDS) consistently for whole > pkgsrc tree? My guess is that mixing builtin x11 and xorg is tricky and in general can't really work. At best each module has to be flipped to xorg globally for pkgsrc if any package needs it, which is what I think you are suggesting. Switching netbsd-5 to modular is a low-churn approach for all platforms except netbsd-5. Like John, I use modular on netbsd-5, and things work pretty well. Trying to fix pkgsrc so that things will build on nebtsd-5/native has a risk of destabilitzing pkgsrc on other platforms, and we're about to enter the Q2 freeze. With Q1, there were a lot of problems with freetype2, but I realize that was partly a security fix being needed at an inopportune time. I would really like to avoid this happening again. I don't see much downside to swtiching netbsd-5 to modular. The real question is what choice better serves a pkgsrc user on netbsd-5. So I think we should switch, and I don't really want to put effort (myself) into making netbsd-5/native work. 2) boost-libs needs newer gcc So we should set GCC_REQD for boost-libs, or perhaps force higher gcc for everything (which seems like overkill).. Possibly, programs that include boost-libs need higher gcc too, because of the complexity in .h files. Perhaps we can put that in the buildlink3.mk. This situation worries me less, because someone with a netbsd-5 system can experiment with the compiler issues and build things more easily than flipping to modular, which invalidates using most binary packages and requires a big rebuild.
Attachment:
pgpb5Rx_Lp231.pgp
Description: PGP signature