On Mar 14, 2013, at 9:32 AM, Nicolas Pavillon <ni...@macports.org> wrote:
> Using compiler.blacklist could sound good, but frankly, it is not always very > encouraging to use fully undocumented commands. Until you mentioned it, I did > not even know the fallback additional command, with which I could find in the > sources the fallback strategies, but by digging in the sources. An understandable position, but many commands/features in wide use are either under-documented or not documented at all. Subports, for instance. > After testing the blacklist command, one thing I could not really understand > is that putting > compiler.blacklist apple-gcc-4.2 > in the Portfile, and then running > sudo port -ds install <port> configure.compiler=apple-gcc-4.2 > still selects apple-gcc-4.2 as the compiler, even though it is indicated as > not working. Is it intended behaviour? This is expected. The black/white/fallback lists are used to determine the default value of configure.compiler. Once configure.compiler is changed from the default, they no longer have an effect. > It this is intended, I don't find ideal to let the user go crash in the > errors even though it was indicated in the Portfile that it should not be > done, and without any visible warning. Sure, but it's also arguable that passing configure.compiler on the command line is intended as a debugging measure meant for explicitly overriding the portfile; as such, the portfile should not interfere with it. (If default_compilers is ever publicly added to macports.conf, it would be the supported method of specifying preferred compilers, and the logic for choosing the default configure.compiler would take it into account while still respecting black/white lists.) vq _______________________________________________ macports-dev mailing list macports-dev@lists.macosforge.org https://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo/macports-dev
