On May 18, 2021, at 00:53, Mojca Miklavec wrote: > On Tue, 18 May 2021 at 07:15, Ken Cunningham wrote: >> >> People are quoting >> <http://tenfourfox.blogspot.com/2021/04/tenfourfox-fpr32b1-available.html#comment-form> >> the lack of llvm-9.0 for SnowLeopard on macports as a sign of the demise >> of older systems, and it does for some reason show red here: >> >> https://ports.macports.org/port/llvm-9.0/builds >> >> but it builds fine, along with most later llvms and all of the earlier ones, >> and it exists on the packages server in all archs: > > To me it looks like it was broken for a very short period of time on > all systems from 10.6 to 10.9 (tons of ports were broken). > https://build.macports.org/builders/ports-10.6_x86_64-watcher/builds/9907 > > It must have been fixed some 30 hours later judging from the > timestamps. I see that Ryan scheduled a rebuild of many failed jobs in > https://build.macports.org/builders/ports-10.6_x86_64-watcher/builds/9920 > including llvm-9.0, but llvm-9.0 is missing on that list of subports. > > I suspect that's because llvm-9.0 must have been the default compiler > for one of the ports built somewhere inbetween those two portwatcher > jobs (logs for portbuilder are gone already, so we cannot investigate > those any longer), and it was built and uploaded successfully as part > of building another unrelated ports, but we most likely don't account > for a broken compiler (as a port dependency) being built explicitly in > a standalone portbuilder job. > > (There are only 12 portwatcher jobs to investigate if we wanted to > find which port was that ;) > > That probably counts as a bug in the Tcl script that returns the list > of subports to be built.
I'm not aware of a bug in that script. >> If anyone knows how to make the ports.macports.org website show it in green, >> that would be appreciated. > > The fastest one would be by revbumping that port ;) Don't do that.