On Nov 23, 2011, at 1:07 AM, Ryan Schmidt wrote:
> On Nov 23, 2011, at 01:45, Jeremy Huddleston wrote:
>
>> On Nov 4, 2011, at 10:12 AM, Jeremy Huddleston wrote:
>>
>>> On Nov 4, 2011, at 1:18 AM, Michael Feiri wrote:
>>>
>>>> One thing I'd like to do while these ports are still "in the making" is to
>>>> adjust the names to follow our usual scheme for versioned ports, e.g.
>>>> gcc46, python27, scala29, etc.
>>>
>>> Ok, go ahead. Sooner rather than later is better.
>>
>> Since Michael never did this, and these ports have been there a while, I'm
>> guessing we should just keep these. I personally never liked the naming
>> without the "-", so I'm glad to be ditching that. The lack of - and .
>> characters makes those port names ambiguous.
>
> Well the vast majority of existent versioned ports are named without dash and
> dot, so it would be more consistent to continue that tradition.
Well seeing as how this is eliminating llvm, I was more focused on making the
new ports fit in with our other tradition, llvm-devel. So there would be
llvm-2,9, llvm-3.0, and llvm-devel ("devel" just being another version which
was always master and thus not ABI safe), but I eventually decided to just use
llvm-3.1 for master.
> I have not had a chance to try these llvm ports with pure; I'll try to do
> that soon. It's meant to be compatible with llvm 2.9 and 3.0.
Thanks. Please let me know how it goes.
_______________________________________________
macports-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/macports-dev
