On Mon, Oct 12, 2015 at 1:49 PM, Jeremy Huddleston Sequoia <jerem...@macports.org> wrote: > >> On Oct 11, 2015, at 23:15, Ryan Schmidt <ryandes...@macports.org> wrote: >> >> On Oct 11, 2015, at 11:14 AM, jerem...@macports.org wrote: >> >>> Revision >>> 141132 >>> Author >>> jerem...@macports.org >>> Date >>> 2015-10-11 09:14:38 -0700 (Sun, 11 Oct 2015) >>> Log Message >>> >>> apple-gcc42: Drop support on ElCap >> >> >> On Oct 11, 2015, at 11:15 AM, jerem...@macports.org wrote: >> >>> Revision >>> 141133 >>> Author >>> jerem...@macports.org >>> Date >>> 2015-10-11 09:15:20 -0700 (Sun, 11 Oct 2015) >>> Log Message >>> >>> llvm-gcc42: Drop support on ElCap >> >> >> On Oct 11, 2015, at 12:09 PM, jerem...@macports.org wrote: >> >>> Revision >>> 141134 >>> Author >>> jerem...@macports.org >>> Date >>> 2015-10-11 10:09:05 -0700 (Sun, 11 Oct 2015) >>> Log Message >>> >>> Refactor and update portconfigure::get_compiler_fallback >>> >>> Separate out list generation into stages for easier updates in the future. >>> Use newer clang versions when using libc++ as our default C++ runtime. >>> Don't add legacy gcc fallbacks on El Capitan. >> >> >> Any particular reason you removed apple-gcc42 and llvm-gcc42 on El Capitan? >> We only just released MacPorts 2.3.4 which finally returned apple-gcc42 and >> llvm-gcc42 to the list of available compilers for Xcode 6 and later >> (r140687). Reverting r141132, apple-gcc42 builds fine for me on 10.11, and >> reverting r141133, llvm-gcc42 builds fine for me with apple-gcc42 on 10.11. >> Are there situations where these compilers don't work correctly because of a >> change in El Capitan? > > They don't support C11 > They don't support C++11 > They don't support libc++ > They've been deprecated for almost 5 years now. > I don't want to give the impression that we actually support this legacy > toolchain on modern systems; it's only purpose was to help build ports that > weren't building with clang. > If you don't want to drop support for them now, what do you consider a good > time? I'd prefer to not keep around legacy compilers if they're not actually > needed. So I guess I'll flip the question to you and ask if there's any > compelling reason why one would still need them on El Cap. Xcode 7's clang > (and indeed macports-clang-3.7) is a much more mature, robust, and reliable > compiler on El Cap than gcc-4.2.
In the fink project, the llvm-gcc42 package is kept only to provide a compiler which fully supports traditional mode cpp for use with the legacy xmkf package. The fink llvm-gcc42 packaging also builds against clang with the appropriate patching. As for when to discard the llvm-gcc42 package entirely, the outer limit would seem to be whenever Apple removes the legacy libstdc++ support and associated compatibility unwinder from the system. > > --Jeremy > > > _______________________________________________ > macports-dev mailing list > macports-dev@lists.macosforge.org > https://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo/macports-dev > _______________________________________________ macports-dev mailing list macports-dev@lists.macosforge.org https://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo/macports-dev
