| Summary: | erlang 10.2.7 version bump + epoll patch | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | Gentoo Linux | Reporter: | Max Loparev <laplandersan> |
| Component: | New packages | Assignee: | Maintainers for Miscelleneous Language Packages [OBSOLETE] <lang-misc+disabled> |
| Status: | RESOLVED TEST-REQUEST | ||
| Severity: | enhancement | CC: | emacs, mkennedy, vapier |
| Priority: | High | ||
| Version: | 2005.1 | ||
| Hardware: | All | ||
| OS: | Linux | ||
| Whiteboard: | |||
| Package list: | Runtime testing required: | --- | |
| Attachments: |
new ebuild
epoll patch diff from 10.2.6 to (adjusted) 10.2.7 erlang-10.2.6-10.2.7.patch diff erlang-10.2.{6,7}.ebuild |
||
|
Description
Max Loparev
2005-09-16 12:05:15 UTC
Created attachment 68603 [details]
new ebuild
Created attachment 68605 [details, diff]
epoll patch
I used your ebuild from Comment #1 and adjusted it to get the poll patch from distfiles, rather than in files/ to save space. I changed the file name to use MY_PV. Attached is my diff from 10.2.6 to the adjusted ebuild for 10.2.7. I tried it out, it seems to work fine. vapier, I can commit it to the tree if you consent. I have recomputed/checked the other patches we apply. Created attachment 70969 [details, diff]
diff from 10.2.6 to (adjusted) 10.2.7
any chance we can make sure upstream erlang is aware of the epoll patch before we start using it ? Created attachment 70981 [details, diff]
erlang-10.2.6-10.2.7.patch
if you want to test & commit this patch, that'd be cool
On second thoughts, perhaps we should apply the epoll patch via a local USE flag? Created attachment 71067 [details, diff]
diff erlang-10.2.{6,7}.ebuild
Support for local USE flag, "epoll".
i dont think we should bother with that ... a quick glance at the code shows that it should fall back to other poll methods if epoll fails to work Commit Attachement #70981 to portage. Thanks for the bug report and epoll information. |
