> On Jan 22, 2015, at 22:33, Lawrence Velázquez <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Jan 22, 2015, at 10:45 PM, Ryan Schmidt <[email protected]> wrote: > >> I don't think we ever intended the version to be changed inside a variant. I >> would consider it a maintainer error to do so. I don't think the portindex >> accommodates more than one version per port, and the portindex is used to >> determine what ports are outdated. > > Hm. So I guess this was a mistake on my part: > > https://trac.macports.org/changeset/131926 > > The problem is that the ld64 we use for 10.6 Intel, v136, can't handle > PowerPC binaries. My last change dropped ld64 +universal to v127.2, but that > versioning isn't reflected in the portindex. > > What would be the best solution here?
ld64 and cctools have been that way for years without issue. Only recently did I remove that in an effort to make the versioning of those ports less complicated. See: https://trac.macports.org/changeset/131487 --Jeremy
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
_______________________________________________ macports-dev mailing list [email protected] https://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo/macports-dev
