In message: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
John Baldwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
: Was the bsd.prog.mk change accidentally included?
:
: > ==== //depot/projects/arm/src/share/mk/bsd.prog.mk#4 -
/Users/imp/p4/arm/src/share/mk/bsd.prog.mk ====
: > @@ -110,17 +110,18 @@
: >
: > .if defined(PROG)
: > _EXTRADEPEND:
: > -.if defined(LDFLAGS) && !empty(LDFLAGS:M-nostdlib)
: > +.if !defined(FOREIGN_BUILD)
: > .if defined(DPADD) && !empty(DPADD)
: > echo ${PROG}: ${DPADD} >> ${DEPENDFILE}
: > .endif
: > -.else
: > +.if defined(LDFLAGS) && !empty(LDFLAGS:M-nostdlib)
: > echo ${PROG}: ${LIBC} ${DPADD} >> ${DEPENDFILE}
: > .if defined(PROG_CXX)
: > echo ${PROG}: ${LIBSTDCPLUSPLUS} >> ${DEPENDFILE}
: > .endif
: > .endif
: > .endif
: > +.endif
: >
: > .if !target(install)
FreeBSD's build systems assumes bad things. This is one nobody has
noticed. Even when compiling purely dynamic, it tries to create a
.depend file with libc.a... Or any .a for that matter. OS X doesn't
have any .a's to speak of, so this was failing. It is part of another
change that tries to hack together enough of an environment to make
things build under OS X, but I hit the wall in binutils and need to
rethink my approach.
Warner
_______________________________________________
freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
