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? R. _______________________________________________ macports-dev mailing list email@example.com https://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo/macports-dev