[MacPorts] #66723: pcre2 @10.42: no such instruction: `lzcnt %eax, %eax'

[MacPorts]

#66723: pcre2 @10.42: no such instruction: `lzcnt %eax, %eax'
---------------------+---------------------
  Reporter:  kencu   |      Owner:  larryv
      Type:  defect  |     Status:  closed
  Priority:  Normal  |  Milestone:
 Component:  ports   |    Version:
Resolution:  fixed   |   Keywords:  leopard
      Port:  pcre2   |
---------------------+---------------------

Comment (by mascguy):

 Per Ken's follow-up e-mail:

 > Everything is always open for discussion, being an opensource, volunteer
 project, for sure.
 >
 > We may never do what I suggested, or perhaps some variation of it.
 Someone may want to keep around clang-3.4 or 3.7 for some reason.
 >
 > I just look for the simplest, most direct approach.
 >
 > gcc10-bootstrap is the last gcc version that can reliably boot from
 system roots on all systems (even Tiger, headaches though there may be).
 So that will be the launchpad for all the newer gcc versions (gcc12 and 13
 at present). All older systems will need to have access to that. Most
 users should get it as a prebuilt binary from the build servers.
 >
 > The current gcc10-bootstrap is not right yet. It will need to be rebuilt
 differently. For example, the "universal" gcc10-bootstrap on Leopard has
 the powerpc part as powerpc code and the Intel part as intel code -- so it
 is not universal. A powerpc mac cannot use it to build Intel code, for
 example.
 >
 > But once gcc10-bootstrap is properly sorted out someday, using it to
 build clang11-bootstrap, and using that to build a current macOS toolchain
 and the latest clang compiler it can build (probably clang-14) seems just
 sensible. There is no reason to go through the current clang mess of
 clang-3.4 -> clang-3.7 -> clang-9.0 -> clang-12 (I think) -> clang-14 ->
 clang-current. That is just -- well -- insanity really.
 >
 > By "how many involved" if you mean humans, no idea. Anyone who cares to
 be, although too many opinions leads to paralysis, as we have seen here
 before. Probably not even will be me involved, to be honest, as I have too
 much too do elsewhere and I am mostly using an arm Mac running Ventura at
 present.

 Sorry for the confusion, I was just asking how many toolchain ports would
 need to be built from source. But it sounds like just `gcc10-bootstrap`,
 along with one or two others? That's not bad at all!

 If we can keep `clang-3.4` around though, that would be good: While it
 doesn't support compiling many ports these days, it is sufficient for the
 fundamentals. (Including `bash`, `coreutils`, `git`, and a number of other
 basics.) But sure, it definitely makes sense to drop the numerous other
 Clang versions beyond that, if the chain can be simplified with
 `gcc10-bootstrap` as a foundation.

 So it all sounds good Ken. Looking forward to seeing the work progress!

-- 
Ticket URL: <https://trac.macports.org/ticket/66723#comment:12>
MacPorts <https://www.macports.org/>
Ports system for macOS