Ah ... I see the difference. I forgot to include my CXXFLAGS settings. I am
doing
CXXFLAGS=-std=c++11 -stdlib=libc++
The code does not compile for the c++11 standard. I reverted that and then I
had only a couple of other issues (there is a problem where a makefile assumes
gcc and is force including some libraries when linking (which was a problem
with my use of libc++ and an issue with the min version for mac in one of the
makefiles). Are you planning to do a move to the updated standard. I doubt you
really care about this in the old code base, though. I don't actually think
that is necessary for me but was just part of how we were standardizing.
Probably not a bad idea for the code, though.
Thanks
-----Original Message-----
From: Adriano dos Santos Fernandes [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Thursday, June 20, 2013 3:46 AM
To: For discussion among Firebird Developers
Subject: Re: [Firebird-devel] Buildling Firebird 2.1.5 with clang++ and libc++
on MacOSX
On 20/06/2013 03:26, Alex Peshkoff wrote:
> On 06/19/13 20:40, Lee Graber wrote:
>> I am hoping I got the correct discussion alias. I am trying to figure out if
>> I am going down a hole that I will not be happy with. My team uses
>> Firebird's embedded engine for a couple of things and we are currently on
>> the 2.1.x line. We are attempting to build embedded for Mac OSX using
>> clang++ and libc++ but as I have started this I am finding myself fixing a
>> lot of syntactical errors. There are lots of issues from c++11-narrowing
>> checks among others. I can see on some threads that there are developers
>> building using clang but from what I can glean that must only be happening
>> on the 3.0 branch (I tried 2.5.x and it also had issues building so I stuck
>> with 2.1.x to try and fix things since we are not looking to bump versions
>> right now). If 3.0 is building with clang++ and libc++ in 3.0 branch, then
>> someone must have done some work.
> As far as I know people used to build at least 2.5 using clang but it
> was more than a year ago. And you know that sometimes warnings in
> compilers tend to become errors in next versions. Therefore 2.5 can be
> not buildable with fresh clang. What about 3.0 - may be it was also
> tried with clang that time, but there were so many changes since that
> time... We use VC on windows and gcc on other systems (there are 2.5
> ports to native compilers for most of widely used unixes). But what
> about Mac - we always used gcc.
>
I always build 3.0 with clang (with libstdc++) and some warnings turned off.
Adriano
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by Windows:
Build for Windows Store.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/windows-dev2dev
Firebird-Devel mailing list, web interface at
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/firebird-devel
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by Windows:
Build for Windows Store.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/windows-dev2dev
Firebird-Devel mailing list, web interface at
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/firebird-devel
