On Apr 8, 2014, at 07:46, Chris Jones wrote: > On 08/04/14 13:41, Joshua Root wrote: >> On 2014-4-8 22:35 , Ryan Schmidt wrote: >>> >>> On Apr 8, 2014, at 07:34, Chris Jones wrote: >>> >>>>>> PS: It's not an issue of me personally upgrading the OS. I'll do that >>>>>> sooner or later. But it would be slightly suboptimal if the port only >>>>>> worked on 10.9. >>>> >>>> As a general point, I agree, only OSX10.9 has full c++11 support. However, >>>> upstream claim to be targeting 10.8 and 10.9, so I would hope it would >>>> work on OSX10.8 as well (to be tested sometime, by someone who has access >>>> to a 10.8 machine). Whilst not ideal, I think this is reasonable coverage >>>> (given root5 will remain available for all versions). >>> >>> Well, libc++ (with full C++11 support) is included in 10.8, it’s just not >>> the default. As long as root doesn’t use any other libraries, it should >>> build fine with that, if you instruct it to. But then any other software >>> that wants to use root would have to do that as well. >> >> Indeed, if you can get around the issues with using a non-default >> runtime on 10.8, then that should transfer pretty easily to 10.7 and >> 10.6 as well. > > Thats OK for a standalone build, but the whole point of having root in > macports is to pick up various dependencies from Macports. This trick would > then only work if the user built all of these dependencies against libc++ as > well.
This would only apply to those dependencies of root that use C++. > SO unless MacPorts is planning on switch its 10.8 builds to by default use > libc++, this doesn't help much with getting the port working on 10.8 At this time, we believe it is best to leave 10.8 and earlier on libstdc++, and use libc++ on 10.9 and later. There is a FAQ entry… _______________________________________________ macports-dev mailing list macports-dev@lists.macosforge.org https://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo/macports-dev
