On 2018-9-10 14:23 , Ryan Schmidt wrote: > > > On Sep 9, 2018, at 23:21, Joshua Root wrote: > >> On 2018-9-10 13:23 , Ryan Schmidt wrote: >>> It is fine for ports to offer different versions to different platforms. Up >>> to now, a "platform" was the combination of an operating system name, major >>> version number, and architecture (PowerPC or Intel). It has been proposed >>> that the C++ standard library should be added to that definition. Code >>> implementing that has already been added to portindex. We have not yet >>> deployed changes to the server to generate separate indexes per C++ >>> standard library, and we have not modified MacPorts base to look for a >>> different index on the server depending on the C++ standard library. We >>> should make both of those changes. >> >> Oh sure, you can multiply the number of portindexes easily enough to >> reflect one more configuration choice. It's not a sustainable design >> direction though. > > We're only talking about adding a libc++ index for 10.4, 10.5, 10.6, 10.7, > 10.8. We're not talking about adding further indexes for other reasons.
I'm not only talking about this one problem, I'm talking about the bigger picture. Anyway this has gone off-topic for -users. - Josh
