On Sun, 23 Feb 2014 20:05:36 -0800 (PST) Thomas Mueller wrote: > from Tijl Coosemans: >> On Sun, 23 Feb 2014 10:57:12 +0000 (UTC) Thomas Mueller wrote: >>> Now I want to know what would happen if I rebuild system with >>> WITHOUT_ICONV=yes >>> in /etc/src.conf >>> and use libiconv from ports. >>> >>> Would it work, and would I have to rebuild all ports? >> >> It would work and it's probably easiest to rebuild all ports. Technically >> you only need to rebuild these packages: >> >> grep -Rl __bsd_iconv /usr/local | xargs -n1 pkg which | sed 's/.* //' | sort >> -u >> >>> It seems including libiconv in base has adverse side effects, the two >>> can clash when both base and ports libiconv are installed. >> >> The two can coexist. It's just that some care must be taken during >> compilation. > > I guess I need to check which ports use which shared libraries, using > pkg? > > So maybe I don't need WITHOUT_ICONV in /etc/src.conf ? > > Maybe base iconv could be enhanced to be identical to the port, by > adding wchar_t support? > > I like Lev Serebryakov's idea of a notice in UPDATING, and would add > that such a notice on possible iconv conflicts could be added tp > UPDATING for both the ports tree and system-source tree.
When I said that some care must be taken during compilation, I meant by port maintainers, not by users, so indeed you don't need WITHOUT_ICONV. In fact there's nothing special you need to do at all that would require an entry in UPDATING. If a port depends on libiconv then just let them like with any other dependency. If a port doesn't build with libiconv installed then just report that like with any other build failure. _______________________________________________ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
