Problem with libomp (was supertux)

[Eric Borisch]

I’m fine moving either way (leave as a separate port, pinned to older
versions on older systems, or build it as part of each clang
independently), but I think removing it as something that comes along with
MP’s clang would be a mistake.

Thanks,
  - Eric

On Sat, Dec 5, 2020 at 7:04 AM Ken Cunningham <
ken.cunningham.webuse at gmail.com> wrote:

> the std:atomic thing was added in 2018, so something else seems funny...
> clang-3.4 supports c++11 after all...
>
> libomp probably should not be a dependency of clang at all
>
> if it was separate from clang, it can be installed using the current
> toolchain rathervthan block it
>
> K
>
> On Dec 5, 2020, at 04:56, Chris Jones <jonesc at hep.phy.cam.ac.uk> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> The problem is simply the latest version uses std::atomic, which requires
> c++11, and the usual fix of requesting this c++ standard in the port file
> does not work due to the fact this port is a clang dependency, so using
> clang as a fallback compiler is not possible.
>
> Note, the port already installs a different version for some systems,
> those using libstdc++
>
> https://github.com/macports/macports-ports/blob/master/lang/libomp/Portfile
>
> So a relatively trivial fix would be to peg macOS 10.9 and older to the
> last version that builds there, version 10.x. Probably a bit simpler than
> having to deal with multiple libomp-X ports...
>
> Chris
>
> On 5 Dec 2020, at 5:57 am, Ken Cunningham <ken.cunningham.webuse at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> 
>
> Attempting to install supertux complains on libomp.
>
> Logfile shows compiler complaints about atomic and variable templates.
>
>
> I noticed that the recent update to libomp-11 failed on 10.8 and 10.9 (and 10.6 and less).
>
>
> This is not a big surprise — more likely a miracle that libomp up to 10.0 built without trouble on every system.
>
>
> I will see if I can fix it — maybe I can — but even if so, libomp 12, 13, or … will be unbuildable eventually.
>
>
> So we’ll need to come up with a libomp plan. There is really no reason (I think) that we can only have one libomp — we could install the one that comes with each llvm and then it would always work, I think. Eg clang-9 would use libomp-9.
>
>
> Anyway, that is for the future. until libomp is fixed, every clang is dead on 10.8 and 10.9
>
>
> BUT — good news. clang (and most everything else) doesn’t really need libomp anyway. I don’t even know why it is listed as a dependency, to be honest. Just delete from the clang portfile, and you’re good to go again, I think (haven’t tried it… but …).
>
>
> Ken
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.macports.org/pipermail/macports-dev/attachments/20201205/1ab4cd55/attachment.htm>