On 21/10/11 21:18 , Alexander Hansen wrote: > On 10/21/11 3:02 PM, Martin Costabel wrote: [] >> What I mean is that a package that does not compile under clang >> needs to include the above fix for xcode-4.2 if your automatic >> switch to clang is implemented. But then it will probably no longer >> work on 10.5 and on 10.6 with xcode-3.2. You would need one info >> file for xcode-4.2 and another one for xcode<=3.2. I don't see how >> this is possible inside the 10.4 tree. >> > > I'm showing llvm-gcc-4.2 and llvm-g++ as part of Xcode 3.2.6 (actually > all the way back to 3.2.3 in my pkgutil history), so we're probably > not going to break things for people on 10.6 who have stayed current > with Xcode.
Yes, it exists, but whether it works correctly is another question. It would have to be tested. > 10.5, of course, is another matter. At least, this could be captured via the Distribution field and duplication of info files. But there are lots of packages in the 10.4 tree for which the compatibility with clang is unknown because it hasn't yet been tested. Is the possible benefit for a tiny minority of xcode-4.2 users on Snow Leopard really worth all this hassle? -- Martin ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ The demand for IT networking professionals continues to grow, and the demand for specialized networking skills is growing even more rapidly. Take a complimentary Learning@Cisco Self-Assessment and learn about Cisco certifications, training, and career opportunities. http://p.sf.net/sfu/cisco-dev2dev _______________________________________________ Fink-devel mailing list Fink-devel@lists.sourceforge.net List archive: http://news.gmane.org/gmane.os.apple.fink.devel Subscription management: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fink-devel
