the std:atomic thing was added in 2018, so something else seems funny... clang-3.4 supports c++11 after all...
libomp probably should not be a dependency of clang at all if it was separate from clang, it can be installed using the current toolchain rathervthan block it K > On Dec 5, 2020, at 04:56, Chris Jones <jon...@hep.phy.cam.ac.uk> wrote: > > Hi, > > The problem is simply the latest version uses std::atomic, which requires > c++11, and the usual fix of requesting this c++ standard in the port file > does not work due to the fact this port is a clang dependency, so using clang > as a fallback compiler is not possible. > > Note, the port already installs a different version for some systems, those > using libstdc++ > > https://github.com/macports/macports-ports/blob/master/lang/libomp/Portfile > > So a relatively trivial fix would be to peg macOS 10.9 and older to the last > version that builds there, version 10.x. Probably a bit simpler than having > to deal with multiple libomp-X ports... > > Chris > >>> On 5 Dec 2020, at 5:57 am, Ken Cunningham <ken.cunningham.web...@gmail.com> >>> wrote: >>> >>> >>> Attempting to install supertux complains on libomp. >>> >>> Logfile shows compiler complaints about atomic and variable templates. >>> >> I noticed that the recent update to libomp-11 failed on 10.8 and 10.9 (and >> 10.6 and less). >> >> This is not a big surprise — more likely a miracle that libomp up to 10.0 >> built without trouble on every system. >> >> I will see if I can fix it — maybe I can — but even if so, libomp 12, 13, or >> … will be unbuildable eventually. >> >> So we’ll need to come up with a libomp plan. There is really no reason (I >> think) that we can only have one libomp — we could install the one that >> comes with each llvm and then it would always work, I think. Eg clang-9 >> would use libomp-9. >> >> Anyway, that is for the future. until libomp is fixed, every clang is dead >> on 10.8 and 10.9 >> >> BUT — good news. clang (and most everything else) doesn’t really need libomp >> anyway. I don’t even know why it is listed as a dependency, to be honest. >> Just delete from the clang portfile, and you’re good to go again, I think >> (haven’t tried it… but …). >> >> Ken
