macOS Big Sur is version 11 not 11.0

[Mark Anderson]

Yeah, my money is on 11.X being the 11.X SDK since that is typically the
pattern with iOS.

On Wed, Nov 18, 2020 at 10:21 PM Chris Jones <jonesc at hep.phy.cam.ac.uk>
wrote:

>
>
> > On 19 Nov 2020, at 3:07 am, Ryan Schmidt <ryandesign at macports.org>
> wrote:
> >
> > 
> >
> >> On Nov 18, 2020, at 21:04, Chris Jones wrote:
> >>
> >> On 19 Nov 2020, at 2:31 am, Ryan Schmidt wrote:
> >>
> >>>> On Nov 18, 2020, at 20:28, Saagar Jha wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> On Nov 18, 2020, at 18:12, Ryan Schmidt wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Based on the fact that Apple has released a beta of macOS Big Sur
> 11.1 already, we can now see that Big Sur should be referred to as version
> 11, not 11.0 (and it would be reasonable to expect that next year's macOS
> will be version 12).
> >>>>>
> >>>>> If you are fixing any ports that had been coded to assume the macOS
> version was always 10.x, be sure that you're not fixing it to simply accept
> versions 10.x or 11.x. Instead, remove any assumption about the version
> number so that you won't have to revisit the problem again every year.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> When Josh released MacPorts 2.6.4 recently, he used the number 11.0
> on the Big Sur installer package. For the next version, we should use the
> version number 11 to denote Big Sur.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I did the same when naming the Big Sur buildbot machines and will
> change them from 11.0 to 11 soon.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Part of our decision to use "11.0" came from the way that Apple
> named the SDK: MacOSX11.0.sdk. We will have to see if they change this to
> MacOSX11.1.sdk in a future version of Xcode and the CLT. If they do, that
> would represent a change from their previous strategy, and it would be a
> problem for MacPorts because the SDK path gets baked into some ports.
> Previously this was ok since the SDK path would stay the same for the life
> of the OS version, but if it now changes during the life of the OS we may
> find ourselves needing to rebuild some ports to update their SDK paths.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> We may also need to adjust how MacPorts selects the SDK version and
> SDK path, depending on whether Apple changes the SDK name.
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>>> The macOS SDK in Xcode 11.3 is MacOSX11.1.sdk.
> >>>
> >>> Presumably you mean Xcode 12.3.
> >>>
> >>> But ok, then this will suck, and users on Big Sur will need to make
> sure that they use an Xcode version that has the right SDK for their
> *minor* OS version.
> >>
> >> Maybe macports should move away from using the versioned  sdk and just
> use the versionless link instead, which should also be present...
> >
> > MacPorts should be falling back to MacOSX.sdk if the versioned one is
> not available:
> >
> >
> https://github.com/macports/macports-base/commit/73ee4b496ffb35ae8c57606580c8b2e7cd440b34
> >
> > However we would rather use the versioned one to be sure it's the right
> version. Software written specifically for Macs may be able to deal with a
> newer-than-OS-version SDK, but most software in MacPorts isn't written
> specifically for Macs and can't always cope with that.
>
> I guess we will have to wait and see how much of a pain the sdk version
> changing each minor os update, if thats what is indeed going to happen,
> will be, and then decide whats the lesser evil here..
> >
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.macports.org/pipermail/macports-dev/attachments/20201118/242a305b/attachment.htm>