> On Sep 3, 2017, at 16:16, db <[email protected]> wrote: > > On 3 Sep 2017, at 13:47, Rainer Müller <[email protected]> wrote: >> The other option to switch would be to just change the default of >> cxx_stdlib with the next 2.x release, wipe all existing binary packages >> and ask all existing users on legacy systems to uninstall, then >> reinstall all their ports. Less work for developers, much frustration >> for users. > > Wouldn't switching cxx_stdlib to and having the bots build binaries with > libc++ actually benefit both developers and users? >
I have not followed the development of the cxx11 1.1 portgroup so I don't know the benefits and drawbacks of using it compared to using libc++. We had intended to have a separate set of buildbot workers build for libc++ for <= 10.8. But the first step for that is to decide how to differentiate libstdc++ archives from libc++ archives on the packages server. Options include modifying the filename (e.g. including the string "libc++" in libc++ archives for <= 10.8), or storing them in a different directory (e.g. a "libc++" directory). Once that's decided, it needs to be implemented in MacPorts base and in our buildbot infrastructure. Then we can release that version of MacPorts base and set up the new buildbot workers so they can get started building archives, and port maintainers can get started fixing the many build problems I anticipate this will expose. Then, sometime later, we could encourage libstdc++ users to upgrade to libc++.
