[MacPorts] #37980: Trunk breaks ports using llvm-gcc without automatically adding a dependency on macports-llvm-gcc

[MacPorts]

#37980: Trunk breaks ports using llvm-gcc without automatically adding a dependency
on macports-llvm-gcc
--------------------------------+------------------------
  Reporter:  macsforever2000@…  |      Owner:  jeremyhu@…
      Type:  defect             |     Status:  reopened
  Priority:  Normal             |  Milestone:
 Component:  base               |    Version:  2.1.99
Resolution:                     |   Keywords:
      Port:  mysql5 mysql51     |
--------------------------------+------------------------

Comment (by jeremyhu@…):

 Replying to [comment:13 cal@…]:
 > Replying to [comment:12 jeremyhu@…]:
 > > Leaving it as 4.6 allows developers to see what will happen when the
 next version of XCode is released, so developers have time to react.
 >
 > TBH, we haven't cared about future Xcode updates previously, I don't see
 why we're handling this one different.

 Maybe you haven't, but I certainly started making sure projects built with
 clang well before we moved to it being default.  This has been a long time
 coming.

 > Go ahead and implement a deprecation warning along with suggestions on
 how to make the port future proof, if you want, but breaking stuff
 completely is not a good way to handle this, IMO.

 I'm not sure what you mean by that.  llvm-gcc is going away as a fallback
 option in the next XCode release whether we are ready for it or not.

 > At the moment all we have is breakage of otherwise well-working ports
 and no clear strategy on how to fix the breakage (other than in trunk,
 where it was not fixed so far). Are you suggesting we should add the hack
 ryan commited above to all affected ports? That doesn't sound like a good
 solution to me.

 No, I don't want to add that block to all the ports.  base needs to have
 #32542 fixed before the next version of XCode is released.  In the mean
 time, you can manually 'sudo port -v install llvm-gcc42'

 > > If you want to be coddled and don't want to actually fix bugs, you can
 use the 2.1 branch. If you want to actually find and fix bugs before they
 impact our users, use trunk.
 >
 > It might have escaped your attention, but I am actually doing
 development work of MacPorts base on trunk and I am actually fixing bugs.
 See the Changelog. Pointing people to bugs without having a proper way to
 solve them sounds useless to me, though. It's annoying.

 I'm not saying you need to be coddled.  You obviously noticed that it was
 a missing dependency.  I'm saying that in general if a developer just
 wants to work on a small set of ports and not find/fix larger issues, they
 should use the release branch.  If you use trunk, you are essentially
 opting in to finding issues like this and being ok implementing simple
 workarounds 'sudo port -v install llvm-gcc42' until the underlying issue
 is fixed.

-- 
Ticket URL: <https://trac.macports.org/ticket/37980#comment:14>
MacPorts <http://www.macports.org/>
Ports system for Mac OS