I’m fine moving either way (leave as a separate port, pinned to older versions on older systems, or build it as part of each clang independently), but I think removing it as something that comes along with MP’s clang would be a mistake.
Thanks, - Eric On Sat, Dec 5, 2020 at 7:04 AM Ken Cunningham < ken.cunningham.web...@gmail.com> wrote: > 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 > >