llvm-9.0 on 10.6.8 shows red -- but it builds

[Ryan Schmidt]

On May 18, 2021, at 00:53, Mojca Miklavec wrote:

> On Tue, 18 May 2021 at 07:15, Ken Cunningham wrote:
>> 
>> People are quoting <http://tenfourfox.blogspot.com/2021/04/tenfourfox-fpr32b1-available.html#comment-form>  the lack of llvm-9.0 for SnowLeopard on macports as a sign of the demise of older systems, and it does for some reason show red here:
>> 
>> https://ports.macports.org/port/llvm-9.0/builds
>> 
>> but it builds fine, along with most later llvms and all of the earlier ones, and it exists on the packages server in all archs:
> 
> To me it looks like it was broken for a very short period of time on
> all systems from 10.6 to 10.9 (tons of ports were broken).
>    https://build.macports.org/builders/ports-10.6_x86_64-watcher/builds/9907
> 
> It must have been fixed some 30 hours later judging from the
> timestamps. I see that Ryan scheduled a rebuild of many failed jobs in
>    https://build.macports.org/builders/ports-10.6_x86_64-watcher/builds/9920
> including llvm-9.0, but llvm-9.0 is missing on that list of subports.
> 
> I suspect that's because llvm-9.0 must have been the default compiler
> for one of the ports built somewhere inbetween those two portwatcher
> jobs (logs for portbuilder are gone already, so we cannot investigate
> those any longer), and it was built and uploaded successfully as part
> of building another unrelated ports, but we most likely don't account
> for a broken compiler (as a port dependency) being built explicitly in
> a standalone portbuilder job.
> 
> (There are only 12 portwatcher jobs to investigate if we wanted to
> find which port was that ;)
> 
> That probably counts as a bug in the Tcl script that returns the list
> of subports to be built.

I'm not aware of a bug in that script.


>> If anyone knows how to make the ports.macports.org website show it in green, that would be appreciated.
> 
> The fastest one would be by revbumping that port ;)

Don't do that.