standard way to require c++11?

Brandon Allbery allbery.b at
Tue Apr 14 07:32:32 PDT 2015

On Tue, Apr 14, 2015 at 10:23 AM, René J.V. <rjvbertin at> wrote:

> >The main problem is that Apple's own C++ stuff is based on either a
> >pre-C++11 libstdc++ or a C++11 libc++. You could probably build an
> official
> >GPL3-d libstdc++ with C++11 support and it would probably even work (that
> If that is equivalent to replacing the system libstdc++ with the one from
> port:gcc-4x then no, that doesn't work. Or rather, it seemed to work just
> fine until I had to reboot. Then things started to fail.

I was not talking about actually replacing the system libstdc++; you get
what you deserve if you do that. I would expect something linking against
an alternative libstdc++ to have some chance to work, though.

> >being one of the points of C++11) but might not be able to distribute the
> >resulting objects/binaries because of conflicts between GPL and Apple's
> >licenses.
> How large an intersection would there be between the users on old(er) OS X
> versions who require a C++11 compatible libstdc++ and those who ship
> commercial binaries?

I was thinking more (a) buildbots (b) tossing the result on a web page for
others to download instead of having to do the whole weird setup themselves.

> (PS: we're talking about the equivalent of Microsoft's msvc runtimes, no?)

Not exactly, as that includes libc. This is just the glue that allows C++
objects to work and be shared between components; things blow up if some
components expect a C++11-compatible object and get a pre-C++11 object, or
vice versa.

brandon s allbery kf8nh                               sine nomine associates
allbery.b at                                  ballbery at
unix, openafs, kerberos, infrastructure, xmonad
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <>

More information about the macports-dev mailing list