[MacPorts] #41576: poxml @4.11.2 (kde, kde4) build failure on OSX 10.9 on x86-64, also blocks kdesdk4 build

[MacPorts]

#41576: poxml @4.11.2 (kde, kde4) build failure on OSX 10.9 on x86-64, also blocks
kdesdk4 build
---------------------------+---------------------
  Reporter:  FoolishEwe@…  |      Owner:  nicos@…
      Type:  defect        |     Status:  new
  Priority:  Normal        |  Milestone:
 Component:  ports         |    Version:  2.2.1
Resolution:                |   Keywords:
      Port:  poxml         |
---------------------------+---------------------

Comment (by FoolishEwe@…):

 Thanks, that appears to have worked, it looks like I was able to get poxml
 to install, i.e.
 {{{
 sh-3.2$ sudo port install poxml
 --->  Computing dependencies for poxml
 --->  Fetching archive for poxml
 --->  Attempting to fetch poxml-4.11.4_0.darwin_13.x86_64.tbz2 from
 http://packages.macports.org/poxml
 --->  Attempting to fetch poxml-4.11.4_0.darwin_13.x86_64.tbz2 from
 http://lil.fr.packages.macports.org/poxml
 --->  Attempting to fetch poxml-4.11.4_0.darwin_13.x86_64.tbz2 from
 http://mse.uk.packages.macports.org/sites/packages.macports.org/poxml
 --->  Fetching distfiles for poxml
 --->  Verifying checksums for poxml
 --->  Extracting poxml
 --->  Applying patches to poxml
 --->  Configuring poxml
 --->  Building poxml
 --->  Staging poxml into destroot
 --->  Installing poxml @4.11.4_0
 --->  Activating poxml @4.11.4_0

 Don't forget that dbus needs to be started as the local user (not with
 sudo) before any
 KDE programs will launch.
 To start it run the following command:
  launchctl load -w /Library/LaunchAgents/org.freedesktop.dbus-
 session.plist

 --->  Cleaning poxml
 --->  Updating database of binaries: 100.0%
 --->  Scanning binaries for linking errors: 100.0%
 --->  No broken files found.
 }}}
 Although the command completes successfully, it is odd that we had this
 error.

 Regarding the problem, the symptom and the patch (fix/workaround), is this
 the right place to discuss next steps?

 If so,

 1) Do the maintainers need more information from me (since I don't think
 they can personally observe this on their configurations)?
 2) Is this patch a fix suitable for general consumption, or is it a
 workaround for a small group (perhaps only me) of users?
 3) Will this patch (or some related fix) be propagated into the mainline
 (i.e. can I safely do a port selfupdate and port upgrade outdated)?

-- 
Ticket URL: <https://trac.macports.org/ticket/41576#comment:21>
MacPorts <http://www.macports.org/>
Ports system for OS X