On 08/04/14 01:48, Ryan Schmidt wrote:
On Apr 7, 2014, at 18:09, Christopher Jones wrote:
p.s. whats the most recent MacPorts clang compiler you can install on OSX10.7 ?
clang 3.4 and earlier should build fine on 10.7.
Indeed. They aren't quite the same thing though in the end, as on OSX
On Apr 8, 2014, at 03:06, Chris Jones jon...@hep.phy.cam.ac.uk wrote:
On 08/04/14 01:48, Ryan Schmidt wrote:
On Apr 7, 2014, at 18:09, Christopher Jones wrote:
p.s. whats the most recent MacPorts clang compiler you can install on
OSX10.7 ?
clang 3.4 and earlier should build fine on
Indeed. They aren't quite the same thing though in the end, as on OSX 10.8 and
newer it supports c++11, whereas on 10.7 it doesn't, because of the underlying
system support. So the same clang34 compiler now builds root6 fine on OSX10.9,
but fails on 10.7.
My recollection of all the previous
On Tue, Apr 8, 2014 at 10:12 AM, Chris Jones wrote:
Indeed. They aren't quite the same thing though in the end, as on OSX
10.8 and newer it supports c++11, whereas on 10.7 it doesn't, because of the
underlying system support. So the same clang34 compiler now builds root6
fine on OSX10.9, but
Hi,
On 08/04/14 10:14, Mojca Miklavec wrote:
On Tue, Apr 8, 2014 at 10:12 AM, Chris Jones wrote:
Indeed. They aren't quite the same thing though in the end, as on OSX
10.8 and newer it supports c++11, whereas on 10.7 it doesn't, because of the
underlying system support. So the same clang34
On 2014-4-8 18:06 , Chris Jones wrote:
On 08/04/14 01:48, Ryan Schmidt wrote:
On Apr 7, 2014, at 18:09, Christopher Jones wrote:
p.s. whats the most recent MacPorts clang compiler you can install on
OSX10.7 ?
clang 3.4 and earlier should build fine on 10.7.
Indeed. They aren't quite the
You can actually use libc++ all the way back to 10.6 (with the libcxx
port). The trick is that if you build root against libc++, then every
library it uses via a C++ API must also be built against libc++, and
likewise for every library that uses it via a C++ API.
Yes, but that doesn't help
On 2014-4-8 20:02 , Chris Jones wrote:
You can actually use libc++ all the way back to 10.6 (with the libcxx
port). The trick is that if you build root against libc++, then every
library it uses via a C++ API must also be built against libc++, and
likewise for every library that uses it via
On 08/04/14 11:26, Joshua Root wrote:
On 2014-4-8 20:02 , Chris Jones wrote:
You can actually use libc++ all the way back to 10.6 (with the libcxx
port). The trick is that if you build root against libc++, then every
library it uses via a C++ API must also be built against libc++, and
On Tue, Apr 8, 2014 at 12:53 PM, Chris Jones wrote:
On 08/04/14 11:26, Joshua Root wrote:
On 2014-4-8 20:02 , Chris Jones wrote:
You can actually use libc++ all the way back to 10.6 (with the libcxx
port). The trick is that if you build root against libc++, then every
library it uses via a
On Apr 8, 2014, at 03:12, Chris Jones wrote:
Indeed. They aren't quite the same thing though in the end, as on OSX 10.8
and newer it supports c++11, whereas on 10.7 it doesn't, because of the
underlying system support. So the same clang34 compiler now builds root6
fine on OSX10.9, but
On Tue, Apr 8, 2014 at 1:55 PM, Ryan Schmidt wrote:
The point is you wouldn’t be mixing C++ runtimes. On 10.8 and earlier, the
C++ runtime is libstdc++, just as gcc48’s is. They’re different versions of
libstdc++, but sometimes they’re similar enough to still work together.
Does that mean
On Apr 8, 2014, at 07:13, Mojca Miklavec wrote:
On Tue, Apr 8, 2014 at 1:55 PM, Ryan Schmidt wrote:
The point is you wouldn’t be mixing C++ runtimes. On 10.8 and earlier, the
C++ runtime is libstdc++, just as gcc48’s is. They’re different versions of
libstdc++, but sometimes they’re
I didn't say that libc++ doesn't work – I didn't try that at all (I'm
not even sure I know how to do it; maybe I could create a new macports
installation with instructions posted by Jeremy a while ago). I just
said that using clang-3.4 doesn't help as that doesn't support all
c++11 features
PS: It's not an issue of me personally upgrading the OS. I'll do that
sooner or later. But it would be slightly suboptimal if the port only
worked on 10.9.
As a general point, I agree, only OSX10.9 has full c++11 support.
However, upstream claim to be targeting 10.8 and 10.9, so I would hope
On Apr 8, 2014, at 07:34, Chris Jones wrote:
PS: It's not an issue of me personally upgrading the OS. I'll do that
sooner or later. But it would be slightly suboptimal if the port only
worked on 10.9.
As a general point, I agree, only OSX10.9 has full c++11 support. However,
upstream
On 08/04/14 13:35, Ryan Schmidt wrote:
On Apr 8, 2014, at 07:34, Chris Jones wrote:
PS: It's not an issue of me personally upgrading the OS. I'll do that
sooner or later. But it would be slightly suboptimal if the port only
worked on 10.9.
As a general point, I agree, only OSX10.9 has full
On 2014-4-8 22:35 , Ryan Schmidt wrote:
On Apr 8, 2014, at 07:34, Chris Jones wrote:
PS: It's not an issue of me personally upgrading the OS. I'll do that
sooner or later. But it would be slightly suboptimal if the port only
worked on 10.9.
As a general point, I agree, only OSX10.9 has
On 08/04/14 13:41, Joshua Root wrote:
On 2014-4-8 22:35 , Ryan Schmidt wrote:
On Apr 8, 2014, at 07:34, Chris Jones wrote:
PS: It's not an issue of me personally upgrading the OS. I'll do that
sooner or later. But it would be slightly suboptimal if the port only
worked on 10.9.
As a
On Tue, Apr 8, 2014 at 2:41 PM, Joshua Root wrote:
On 2014-4-8 22:35 , Ryan Schmidt wrote:
On Apr 8, 2014, at 07:34, Chris Jones wrote:
PS: It's not an issue of me personally upgrading the OS. I'll do that
sooner or later. But it would be slightly suboptimal if the port only
worked on 10.9.
On 2014-4-8 22:48 , Mojca Miklavec wrote:
I'll see if I can manage to build the whole ROOT 6 with -stdlib=libc++
(without referencing any other piece from MacPorts). But that probably
means that I shouldn't use OpenGL from the system, right?
otool -L
On Tue, Apr 8, 2014 at 2:46 PM, Chris Jones wrote:
Thats OK for a standalone build, but the whole point of having root in
macports is to pick up various dependencies from Macports. This trick would
then only work if the user built all of these dependencies against libc++ as
well. SO unless
On Tue, Apr 8, 2014 at 2:53 PM, Joshua Root wrote:
On 2014-4-8 22:48 , Mojca Miklavec wrote:
I'll see if I can manage to build the whole ROOT 6 with -stdlib=libc++
(without referencing any other piece from MacPorts). But that probably
means that I shouldn't use OpenGL from the system, right?
On 08/04/14 13:52, Mojca Miklavec wrote:
On Tue, Apr 8, 2014 at 2:46 PM, Chris Jones wrote:
Thats OK for a standalone build, but the whole point of having root in
macports is to pick up various dependencies from Macports. This trick would
then only work if the user built all of these
I'll see if I can manage to build the whole ROOT 6 with -stdlib=libc++
(without referencing any other piece from MacPorts). But that probably
means that I shouldn't use OpenGL from the system, right?
Don't forget, you will also need to rebuild each and every port that
root uses, that uses a
SO unless MacPorts is planning on switch its 10.8 builds to by default use
libc++, this doesn't help much with getting the port working on 10.8
At this time, we believe it is best to leave 10.8 and earlier on libstdc++, and
use libc++ on 10.9 and later. There is a FAQ entry…
Yes of
Hi,
For me, I’m afraid, I think this means ROOT6 can only be properly supported on
10.8 or newer. As its only these OS versions that have c++11 support. If
upstream have decided ROOT from version 6 onwards requires c++11 support, I am
not going to second guess them.
I previously had variants
p.s. whats the most recent MacPorts clang compiler you can install on OSX10.7 ?
On 8 Apr 2014, at 12:03am, Christopher Jones jon...@hep.phy.cam.ac.uk wrote:
Hi,
For me, I’m afraid, I think this means ROOT6 can only be properly supported
on 10.8 or newer. As its only these OS versions that
28 matches
Mail list logo
