Newer versions of xar for older OS versions fail to build on the build bots, as they often rely on additions to the macOS API. I pin them to the last known version to build successfully.
I look to the build bots to determine if older OS versions can build a new xar release, as my local development machine runs Sequoia, while I also have machines running Tahoe, and one old MBP with Ventura (which is rarely used and updated). I’m always open to PRs and trac tickets when it pertains to supporting older OS versions. Marius -- Marius Schamschula > On Mar 19, 2026, at 2:00 PM, Fred Wright <[email protected]> wrote: > > > On Thu, 19 Mar 2026, Riccardo Mottola via macports-dev wrote: > >> remembering this is on 10.11 >> >> Joshua Root wrote: >>> So I don't know how it could continue to be linked with a version of >>> libxml2 that isn't installed, after you ran rev-upgrade. >> >> my issue is that rev-upgrade fails before for another package, so it aborts >> earlier. > > You must be running in the default "rebuild" mode, which I haven't used in > years since it's mutually exclusive with "report", even though those > behaviors should be orthogonal. I wouldn't be surprised if rev-upgrade in > "rebuild" mode failed to honor '-p'. > >> rev-upgrade detect broken packages which did not receive a bump and not >> listed as top be upgraded. >> >> Is there a way to manually "rev-upgrade" a specific package? I cannot >> rebuild it using "upgrade" because the version is the same. > > Yes, albeit somewhat obscurely. Either: > [sudo] port -n upgrade --force <port>... > or: > [sudo] port -ns upgrade --force <port>... > > Without the '-n', it would also forcibly upgrade the dependencies, which is > probably unnecessary and a waste of time. > > The optional '-s' depends on whether a valid precompiled binary is expected. > If so (i.e., only your local copy is broken), then omitting the '-s' allows > using it. But if the issue also affects the buildbots, then the '-s' ensures > a local build (obviously only useful if the issue is locally fixed). > > Note that the '--force' option specfically for "port upgrade" is not the same > as the '-f' option for the generic "port". > > I found it necessary to do this with 'xar' on a few systems here. > > Fred Wright
