A new version - this updates the port to the 2012-03-22 weekly release (effectively Go v1 RC2) and fixes the issue with the regress path for the "go" binary.
ok?
On Friday 23 March 2012, Joel Sing wrote:
> Attached is an updated version of the port for Go:
>
> - Version numbering is now 1.0preYYYYMMDD as suggested by sthen.
>
> - Fixed PLIST issue so that the port now works correctly on both amd64 and
> i386.
>
> - Fixed issue with USE_SYSTRACE - for the time being a Go binary needs to
> be able to use the sysarch() syscall in order to setup TLS.
>
> ok?
>
> On Thursday 22 March 2012, Joel Sing wrote:
> > The attached is an initial port for the Go programming language
> > (www.golang.org). A little background - Go is approaching a "Go version1"
> > release and at that point it will have a stable API. Unfortunately, for
> > several reasons Go version 1 will not be officially supported on OpenBSD,
> > however there are only a few issues that prevent this - the diffs
> > included in the port address known outstanding issues for the OpenBSD
> > runtime, which will let us provide a working port.
> >
> > Open questions:
> >
> > 1. Version numbering - in some ways once Go version 1 is release the
> > versioning will be somewhat like Python and in the future you may want to
> > install Go version 1 and Go version 2 on the same machine (different APIs
> > for example). However, during the development phase there are weekly
> > tagged releases that are simply YYYY-MM-DD versioned. For this reason I'm
> > thinking that the version numbering should be 0.YYYYMMDD for now and 1.0
> > for the version 1 release. Continued development could then follow on the
> > 0.YYYYMMDD releases. Or should we have two packages - a "go-weekly"
> > package and a "go" package?
> >
> > 2. The installation locations is going to get somewhat messy - due to
> > some of the internals of Go's design everything except a few user
> > binaries (so documentaiton, libraries, source code, etc) needs to be
> > under a single directory. For now I've used the "recommended" default of
> > /usr/local/go, however this is not really acceptable for OpenBSD.
> > Suggestions as to what would be the closest suitable location? I plan on
> > talking with upstream re being able to split this so that we at least
> > have tool/libexec type binaries and libraries separated out from the
> > docs/source.
> >
> > 3. License - Go is released under a BSD-style license, however some parts
> > (like the documentation) are under other licenses (Creative Commons
> > Attribution 3.0 License). How do we handle this?
--
"Reason is not automatic. Those who deny it cannot be conquered by it.
Do not count on them. Leave them alone." -- Ayn Rand
go-port.tar.gz
Description: application/tgz
