On Jan 29, 2013, at 11:05, [email protected] wrote: > Revision: 102258 > https://trac.macports.org/changeset/102258 > Author: [email protected] > Date: 2013-01-29 09:05:15 -0800 (Tue, 29 Jan 2013) > Log Message: > ----------- > Use macports-llvm-gcc-4.2 as a backup instead of llvm-gcc-4.2 with XCode 4.6 > > It was announced that llvm-gcc is deprecated in XCode 4.6 and will be removed > in the next major release. This updates base to fallback on the llvm-gcc42 > port rather than the Apple-provided llvm-gcc when using this version of XCode > to allow developers using base trunk to find issues with ports that may exist > with the removal of llvm-gcc from XCode. > > I do not reccomend shipping this change in the 2.1.x release series. > > Modified Paths: > -------------- > trunk/base/src/port1.0/portconfigure.tcl > > Modified: trunk/base/src/port1.0/portconfigure.tcl > =================================================================== > --- trunk/base/src/port1.0/portconfigure.tcl 2013-01-29 17:04:55 UTC (rev > 102257) > +++ trunk/base/src/port1.0/portconfigure.tcl 2013-01-29 17:05:15 UTC (rev > 102258) > @@ -448,6 +448,8 @@ > return $default_compiler > } elseif {$xcodeversion == "none" || $xcodeversion == ""} { > return {cc} > + } elseif {[vercmp $xcodeversion 4.6] >= 0} { > + return {clang macports-llvm-gcc-4.2 apple-gcc-4.2} > } elseif {[vercmp $xcodeversion 4.2] >= 0} { > return {clang llvm-gcc-4.2 apple-gcc-4.2} > } elseif {[vercmp $xcodeversion 4.0] >= 0} {
I was just looking at this code earlier and was going to suggest something similar. If the goal here is to help maintainers find differences between llvm-gcc-4.2 and macports-llvm-gcc-4.2 that might cause problems for ports, then fine, but it would be more correct to check Xcode version >= 4.7, wouldn't it? No reason why the llvm-gcc-4.2 in Xcode 4.6 shouldn't be used, right? _______________________________________________ macports-dev mailing list [email protected] https://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo/macports-dev
