On Tue, Dec 27, 2011 at 12:44:10PM +1100, matthew green wrote:
> > That adds a lot of restrictions on when UNSUPPORT_COMPILER.XXX can be
> > set. I don't think it's a good idea to do that.
>
> i don't understand this. can you explain it further?
The suggested pattern allows the variable to be se
> On Mon, Dec 26, 2011 at 05:49:41PM +1100, matthew green wrote:
> >
> > > For completeness, it should be:
> > >
> > > .if ${HAVE_GCC:U} == "45" && ${MACHINE_CPU} == "arm"
> > > COPTS.getaddrinfo.c+= ${${ACTIVE_CC} == "gcc" :? -fno-tree-ter :}
> > > COPTS.gethnameaddr.c+=${${ACTIVE_CC} =
On Sat, Dec 24, 2011 at 02:13:21AM +, Michael Lorenz wrote:
> Module Name: src
> Committed By: macallan
> Date: Sat Dec 24 02:13:21 UTC 2011
>
> Modified Files:
> src/sys/dev/rasops: rasops32.c
>
> Log Message:
> rename alpha variable to avoid conflict with a platform macro on
On Mon, Dec 26, 2011 at 05:49:41PM +1100, matthew green wrote:
>
> > For completeness, it should be:
> >
> > .if ${HAVE_GCC:U} == "45" && ${MACHINE_CPU} == "arm"
> > COPTS.getaddrinfo.c+= ${${ACTIVE_CC} == "gcc" :? -fno-tree-ter :}
> > COPTS.gethnameaddr.c+= ${${ACTIVE_CC} == "gcc" :?
