Changing default cxx_stdlib to libc++

[db]

On 11 Mar 2018, at 15:47, Ken Cunningham <ken.cunningham.webuse at gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Mar 11, 2018, at 06:06, db <iamsudo at gmail.com> wrote:
>> On 11 Mar 2018, at 02:47, "Kenneth F. Cunningham" <ken.cunningham.webuse at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> On 2018-03-10, at 12:23 PM, db wrote:
>>>> Except for building from source for minor versions and revbumps, especially large binaries, and for ports that have open defects. Oh well…
>>> Well, everything for 10.6.8 users on MacPorts is about to get supremely better. Hard to be too upset about that!
>> I don't doubt that! What I don't understand is, why would port be allowed to build a port from source on a certain system that already failed on the buildbot, and what's worse, be left with a port in a non-working state, while downloading binaries would work, because it couldn't donwload something that's failed to build.
> You can sent your buildfromsource value to "never" I believe .... would that do what you're asking?

No. Recently, someone posted about a port dependent on qscintilla-qt4 left in a non-working state because this dependency fails to build. Why is a current version of software made available in a port definition whereby it cannot be built by the buildbot yet in the first place? I noticed that qscintilla-qt4 is not distributed at http://distfiles.macports.org/, although the license should allow it, I guess. But even if it weren't, does the buildbot build software that's not distributable just for the sake of testing? If not, shouldn't it, prior to accepting an updated port definition?