On Mon, Dec 17, 2012 at 11:43 PM, Ryan Schmidt <ryandes...@macports.org>wrote:
> > On Dec 17, 2012, at 22:16, ebori...@macports.org wrote: > > > Revision: 100629 > > https://trac.macports.org/changeset/100629 > > Author: ebori...@macports.org > > Date: 2012-12-17 20:16:28 -0800 (Mon, 17 Dec 2012) > > Log Message: > > ----------- > > mpich[-devel]: Update to use compiler_blacklist_versions. Only create > clang variant when compatible. > > > > Modified Paths: > > -------------- > > trunk/dports/science/mpich/Portfile > > > > Modified: trunk/dports/science/mpich/Portfile > > =================================================================== > > --- trunk/dports/science/mpich/Portfile 2012-12-18 00:57:35 UTC > (rev 100628) > > +++ trunk/dports/science/mpich/Portfile 2012-12-18 04:16:28 UTC > (rev 100629) > > @@ -2,6 +2,7 @@ > > # $Id$ > > > > PortSystem 1.0 > > +PortGroup compiler_blacklist_versions 1.0 > > > > name mpich > > set pkgname mpich2 > > @@ -84,6 +85,9 @@ > > > > depends_lib-append port:libxml2 > > > > +# Linker for Apple clang version 431.11.66 currently segfaults > > +# See https://trac.macports.org/ticket/36654#comment:9 > > +compiler.blacklist-append {clang >= 421.11.66} > > 431.11.66 or 421.11.66? > > I think the one that is evaluated (421.11.66) is the correct one, but I'll have to check on my ML machine this evening. I'm debating having the +clang variant set as default (when not blacklisted) and the +llvm variant set as default otherwise, and potentially adding a check that one of the compiler variants must be selected (so it is explicit which compiler is being wrapped.) Any thoughts on that (wrt old systems?) - Eric
_______________________________________________ macports-dev mailing list macports-dev@lists.macosforge.org http://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo/macports-dev
