Incorrect.
On Fri, Jan 13, 2012, Richard Thornton wrote:
> keeps looking for library c.60.1 which does not exist in a vanilla 5.0
> install.
>
>
>
> On Mon, Dec 19, 2011 at 10:38 PM, Nick Holland
> <n...@holland-consulting.net>wrote:
>
>> On 12/19/11 14:39, Stuart Henderson wrote:
>> > On 2011-12-19, Richard Thornton <thornton.rich...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> Do a simple clean 5.0 install. One would assume any browser package in
>> the
>> >> packages folder would install. None do for me on sparc, but with a clean
>> >> 4.9 install all 4.9 packages install. I am not a Unix specialist by any
>> >> means but I do know how to type pkg_add .
>> >
>> > Please send a mail to ports@ detailing exactly what you are doing (what
>> > you're typing, what PKG_PATH is set to if you're using it, the contents
>> > of /etc/pkg.conf if you're using that) and what output you see.
>> >
>> > This is the first I've heard of any major problem with 5.0 release
>> > packages on any arch, if there is a problem obviously we need to know
>> > what went wrong so we can avoid it happening in future, but before
>> > digging into that we need to first rule out incorrect procedure.
>>
>> Don't bother, he's doing something very wrong. This is a PEBKAC
>> diagnostic issue, not an OpenBSD issue.
>>
>> Just happened to have a blade100 (the machine he named) sitting here,
>> just loaded it up, but not into production yet, so blew it away (it was
>> at -current, of course) and did exactly what he said:
>>
>> * simple 5.0 install from CD (only non-default was to use ntpd)
>> * set PKG_PATH to my local mirror
>> * pkg_add xxxterm
>> * pkg_add firefox36 (didn't seem to be newer ones for sparc64)
>> * pkg_add dillo
>> * pkg_add conkeror
>> * pkg_add midori
>> * pkg_add kazehakase
>> * pkg_add links+2.2p2
>> * pkg_add elinks
>> * pkg_add w3m-0.5.3
>> * pkg_add links FINALLY! an error! conflict with links+. Package
>> management system worked fine :)
>>
>> Other than links after links+, all installed fine.
>>
>> Starting them all at the same time on a blade100 with only 512M RAM was
>> not my most productive move, but they all seemed to be trying to work,
>> until something ran out of something and X blew me back to a command
>> prompt :)
>>
>> (I gotta play with some of these alternate browsers)
>>
>> Personally, I think he's screwing up between sparc and sparc64. He's
>> being VERY sloppy with the platform name_s_ in his posting, so I suspect
>> it is safe to assume he's doing that elsewhere.
>>
>> Nick.
