Hanspeter,
I've updated the openmpi packaging in the 10.7 tree to build the
newer 1.8.1 openmpi release using the system c/c++ compilers for 10.7/10.8
as was already being done on 10.9. I've added the following change to the
boost1.55.info packaging in the 10.7 tree to adjust for this change.
Index: boost1.55.info
===================================================================
RCS file: /cvsroot/fink/dists/10.7/stable/main/finkinfo/libs/boost1.55.info
,v
retrieving revision 1.2
diff -r1.2 boost1.55.info
4c4
< Revision: 2
---
> Revision: 3
13,14c13,14
< gcc48-compiler,
< openmpi,
---
> gcc49-compiler,
> openmpi (>= 1.8.1-3),
99,100c99,100
< if [ "`uname -r | cut -d. -f1`" -lt "13" ]; then
< perl -pi -e 's|g\+\+|%p/bin/g++-fsf-4.8|g'
tools/build/v2/tools/darwin.jam
---
> if [ "`uname -r | cut -d. -f1`" -lt "11" ]; then
> perl -pi -e 's|g\+\+|%p/bin/g++-fsf-4.9|g'
tools/build/v2/tools/darwin.jam
207,208c207,208
< gcc48-shlibs,
< openmpi-shlibs,
---
> gcc49-shlibs,
> openmpi-shlibs (>= 1.8.1-3),
This rationalizes the linkages on 10.7/10.8 to use the proper system
libstdc++ library so that programs linking in boost1.55-shlibs don't have
to worry about linking in multiple libstdc++ libraries and any
incompatibilities that would cause.
Jack
ps I also took the opportunity to bump the openmpi package to use the
latest gcc49-compiler package hence the same change in boost1.55.info.
On Sat, Apr 26, 2014 at 7:43 PM, Hanspeter Niederstrasser <
f...@snaggledworks.com> wrote:
> On Sat, April 26, 2014 11:14 am, Jack Howarth wrote:
> > Hanspeter,
> > What is the logic behind making boost1.55 build against the
> > g++-fsf-4.8 compiler instead of clang++ on 10.9 and later? By doing that,
> > you require any program that links against boost1.55 and all of its
> > support
> > libraries to be built with g++-fsf-4.8. We were very careful when
> > Mavericks
> > landed to make sure that boost1.53 properly built against libc++ from
> > clang++ rather than any of the libstdc++ releases (system or fsf gcc).
> > This
> > seems like a major regression in the packaging compared to boost1.53. I
> am
> > surprised you resorted to that as the newer boost release should have
> even
> > more libc++ related fixes than 1.53 did.
> > Jack
>
> Jack,
>
> I'm currently traveling and unable to test any issues until Wednesday at
> the earliest, but more likely not until the weekend. I'm OK with the <
> 10.9 conditional you put in to build with clang++ on 10.9 (plus the atomic
> patch). I'll be back towards the middle/end of the week to further
> discuss as needed. If you feel more changes are needed, please discuss on
> here or on #fink with dmacks since he'll understand issues that may arise
> from the package management end. Thanks for your help,
>
> Hanspeter
>
> --
> More agile than a turtle, stronger than a mouse, nobler than a lettuce
>
>
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Accelerate Dev Cycles with Automated Cross-Browser Testing - For FREE
Instantly run your Selenium tests across 300+ browser/OS combos. Get
unparalleled scalability from the best Selenium testing platform available.
Simple to use. Nothing to install. Get started now for free."
http://p.sf.net/sfu/SauceLabs
_______________________________________________
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
