Go 1 was released yesterday - the attached is an updated port. Any further comments? Any oks?
On Monday 26 March 2012, Joel Sing wrote:
> 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
