Re: [macports-ports] branch master updated: gnutls 3.5.15: add doc variant

2017-09-29 Thread Marius Schamschula
gnutls has blacklist { clang < 400 } for i386 and x86_64 > On Sep 29, 2017, at 1:48 PM, Ken Cunningham > wrote: > > argh > > blacklist { clang < 500 }, I meant > > > On 2017-09-29, at 11:47 AM, Ken Cunningham wrote:

Re: [macports-ports] branch master updated: gnutls 3.5.15: add doc variant

2017-09-29 Thread Ken Cunningham
argh blacklist { clang < 500 }, I meant On 2017-09-29, at 11:47 AM, Ken Cunningham wrote: >> But similar to cxx11 1.0, it doesn't do much on systems using libc++, i.e. >> 10.9 or later. >> > > The only thing it does if libc++ is selected is blacklist { clang > 500 } > and *gcc* > > Ken

Re: [macports-ports] branch master updated: gnutls 3.5.15: add doc variant

2017-09-29 Thread Ken Cunningham
> But similar to cxx11 1.0, it doesn't do much on systems using libc++, i.e. > 10.9 or later. > The only thing it does if libc++ is selected is blacklist { clang > 500 } and *gcc* Ken

Re: [macports-ports] branch master updated: gnutls 3.5.15: add doc variant

2017-09-29 Thread Ryan Schmidt
On Sep 29, 2017, at 13:15, Marius Schamschula wrote: > Apparently, building examples (part of the documentation) using the universal > variant under Yosemite needs -stdlib=libstdc++, in other words the cxx11 > PortGroup. This would disable gnutls for older systems. I'm very confused.

Re: [macports-ports] branch master updated: gnutls 3.5.15: add doc variant

2017-09-29 Thread Marius Schamschula
> On Sep 29, 2017, at 1:08 PM, Ryan Schmidt wrote: > > > On Sep 29, 2017, at 11:53, Marius Schamschula wrote: > >> Marius Schamschula (Schamschula) pushed a commit to branch master >> in repository macports-ports. >> >> >>

Re: [macports-ports] branch master updated: gnutls 3.5.15: add doc variant

2017-09-29 Thread Ryan Schmidt
On Sep 29, 2017, at 11:53, Marius Schamschula wrote: > Marius Schamschula (Schamschula) pushed a commit to branch master > in repository macports-ports. > > > https://github.com/macports/macports-ports/commit/8cc85e0fb1b985598bd8873609ae61f82a3e05f2 > > The following commit(s) were added to

Re: [macports-base] 01/02: portconfigure: Don't fall back on macosx if we are unable to find an appropriate versioned SDK

2017-09-29 Thread Jeremy Sequoia
Sent from my iPhone... > On Sep 29, 2017, at 04:50, Ryan Schmidt wrote: > > On Sep 28, 2017, at 19:52, Jeremy Huddleston Sequoia wrote: >>> > On Sep 28, 2017, at 15:54, Ryan Schmidt wrote: Jeremy Huddleston Sequoia (jeremyhu) pushed a commit to

Re: [macports-ports] 01/02: hunspell-en: SCOWL based hunspell dictionary for en_AU, en_CA, en_GB, and en_US

2017-09-29 Thread Leonardo Brondani Schenkel
On 2017-09-29 16:17, Marius Schamschula wrote: 1) I went by repology.org  for the more common package name used by other packaging systems: hunspell-en. Only MacPorts used hunspell-dict-en_*. I was not aware of this site. Nice resource, thanks for the link! 2) The new

Re: [macports-ports] 01/02: hunspell-en: SCOWL based hunspell dictionary for en_AU, en_CA, en_GB, and en_US

2017-09-29 Thread Marius Schamschula
Leonardo, The reasoning behind the renaming is twofold: 1) I went by repology.org for the more common package name used by other packaging systems: hunspell-en. Only MacPorts used hunspell-dict-en_*. https://repology.org/metapackage/hunspell-en/versions

Re: [macports-ports] 01/02: hunspell-en: SCOWL based hunspell dictionary for en_AU, en_CA, en_GB, and en_US

2017-09-29 Thread Leonardo Brondani Schenkel
Quick question regarding the name of the port: I couldn't help but noticing that the port names changed from "hunspell-dict-en" to "hunspell-en". Was is the reasoning behind it? I'm asking because I'm the maintainer for "pt_BR" and I'm going to submit "sv_SE" and I would like to know if the

Re: [macports-base] 01/02: portconfigure: Don't fall back on macosx if we are unable to find an appropriate versioned SDK

2017-09-29 Thread Ryan Schmidt
> On Sep 28, 2017, at 19:52, Jeremy Huddleston Sequoia wrote: > >> On Sep 28, 2017, at 15:54, Ryan Schmidt wrote: >> >>> Jeremy Huddleston Sequoia (jeremyhu) pushed a commit to branch master >>> in repository macports-base. >>> >>> >>>

Re: Uninstalling Mac Ports

2017-09-29 Thread Ryan Schmidt
On Sep 28, 2017, at 21:20, Derick Pillaga wrote: > Hello I was wondering if I uninstalled Mac Ports safely without missing with > my MacBook Pro which was running Mac Port 2.4.1. I followed the steps online > but I want to make sure my system is running properly because when I wrote > the

Re: Dealing with Xcode 9 + macOS <= 10.12 and missing functions

2017-09-29 Thread Ryan Schmidt
On Sep 29, 2017, at 05:08, Leonardo Brondani Schenkel wrote: > On 2017-09-29 12:02, Joshua Root wrote: >> Well, our installation instructions say to install the Command Line Tools, >> which avoids this problem. I guess we could try setting >> MAC_OS_X_VERSION_MAX_ALLOWED explicitly, but unlike

Re: Dealing with Xcode 9 + macOS <= 10.12 and missing functions

2017-09-29 Thread Leonardo Brondani Schenkel
On 2017-09-29 12:02, Joshua Root wrote: Well, our installation instructions say to install the Command Line Tools, which avoids this problem. I guess we could try setting MAC_OS_X_VERSION_MAX_ALLOWED explicitly, but unlike MACOSX_DEPLOYMENT_TARGET, it isn't picked up from the environment by

Re: State of the GnuPG ports

2017-09-29 Thread Leonardo Brondani Schenkel
On 2017-09-14 04:10, Mihai Moldovan wrote: If GPG 2.0 is to be replaced by 2.2, which is really a fork of 2.1, there isn't a lot of sense to keep it around. Just a small clarification: 2.2 *is* 2.1, it has been "promoted", not forked. GPG is using odd numbers for development branches (= major

Re: Dealing with Xcode 9 + macOS <= 10.12 and missing functions

2017-09-29 Thread Joshua Root
On 2017-9-29 18:48 , Leonardo Brondani Schenkel wrote: On 2017-09-29 10:23, Joshua Root wrote: On 2017-9-29 18:14 , Leonardo Brondani Schenkel wrote: This seems to be an issue in XCode 9 to me, since I believe that when setting the deployment target to 10.12 or earlier it should not be

Re: Dealing with Xcode 9 + macOS <= 10.12 and missing functions

2017-09-29 Thread Leonardo Brondani Schenkel
On 2017-09-29 10:23, Joshua Root wrote: On 2017-9-29 18:14 , Leonardo Brondani Schenkel wrote: This seems to be an issue in XCode 9 to me, since I believe that when setting the deployment target to 10.12 or earlier it should not be exposing symbols that are not available at runtime. It is

Re: Dealing with Xcode 9 + macOS <= 10.12 and missing functions

2017-09-29 Thread Joshua Root
On 2017-9-29 18:14 , Leonardo Brondani Schenkel wrote: This seems to be an issue in XCode 9 to me, since I believe that when setting the deployment target to 10.12 or earlier it should not be exposing symbols that are not available at runtime. It is working correctly as far as it goes;

Dealing with Xcode 9 + macOS <= 10.12 and missing functions

2017-09-29 Thread Leonardo Brondani Schenkel
Hi all, I have been bitten by this when building Python [1] but I noticed that many other ports [2][3][4][5] have been affected by the following: - You have macOS 10.12 or earlier - You don't have the command line tools installed - You update all apps from App Store and end up upgrading Xcode