sorry one clarification: what i meant to say with:
> what this liar stated was that 10.6-ppc uses libc++ and that the 10.6-x86_64 > variant does not. is that he stated 10.6-ppc uses libstdc++ but the 10.6-x86_64 variant does not. my apologies. certain personality traits really irritate me. > On Jan 26, 2025, at 4:58 PM, Gagan Sidhu via macports-dev > <[email protected]> wrote: > > took you how long to think of a recovery, which is embedded with lies? > > rootie, are you going to do something about this pathological liar? should i > dig up the tickets where he makes baseless accusations and never responds > because he likes to abuse his power? > > anyways let’s revisit his post, which he conveniently truncates in his > response to the mailing list: > >> Well -- of course 10.6-PPC needs lots and lots and lots and lots of special >> workarounds. >> >> 10.6-PPC is basically 10.5 PPC wearing lipstick and a wig. >> >> It is very very different from 10.6 / Intel / libc++. It builds with gcc, >> not clang. It links against libstdc++, nott libc++. It does not have the >> 10.6 kernel features or framework / library supports. It is much more like >> an early version of 10.5, which is why you need special workarounds all over >> the damn place for it to make it behave like 10.5 even though it reports >> itself as 10.6 >> > > question: where in ken cunningham’s response above, is his implication > (given) obvious? > answer: it isn’t because that’s not what he said. he’s lying to salvage his > hunger to appear intelligent to this list. > > what this liar stated was that 10.6-ppc uses libc++ and that the 10.6-x86_64 > variant does not. > > but this is what ken does: he lies and puts words in others mouths, just like > his unrelenting attacks on my nodejs patches, which he stopped after i asked > pointed questions. > > you should be careful ken. it’s pretty obvious, when someone gathers your > responses and attitude towards me, where it’s coming from. > > be very careful. > >> On Jan 26, 2025, at 4:51 PM, Ken Cunningham <[email protected] >> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >> >> MacPorts defaults all builds on 10.6 to libc++, and has done for YEARS now, >> exactly so that supporting 10.6 won't be a huge, silly project of >> workarounds. >> >> libsdtc++ is supported only so far as it takes to bootstrap libc++ >> >> Everything else you said was pretty much drivel, as usual, and I'll just >> leave it fester. >> >> Ken >> >> >
