On Thursday October 06 2016 04:35:02 Ryan Schmidt wrote:

> If a port requires C++11 / libc++, include the cxx11 1.0 portgroup.

I wonder if that shouldn't simply be done by the Qt5 PortGroup then ...

I don't really follow what that portgroup does. Is there a risk of breaking 
anything when including it de-facto on 10.7+?

> Until we figure out how to prevent it, you'll still receive failure 
> notifications from non-libc++ buildbot workers about that.

Surely there must be a way to tell the bots not to bother trying to build a 
given port, which would (or could) trickle upwards to all dependencies that 
require the port installed for building?

macports-dev mailing list

Reply via email to