Question regarding workaround for gnutar 1.20 on 10.5 (and related question about gcc)

[Tabitha McNerney]

Hello all (again) --

This is rather interesting. I separately installed the two gcc 4.2 ports
mentioned in my email that started this thread (apple-gcc42 and gcc42).
After each install, I attempted then to build and install (after first
cleaning) gnutar 1.20. In both cases gnutar 1.20 failed to install.

So I guess this means that the beta of gcc 4.2 is that which is likely
associated with pre-release of XCode 3.1? Any suggestions? Has anyone
successfully built gnutar 1.20 on Leopard 10.5.x?

Thanks,

T.M.

On Sun, Jun 22, 2008 at 1:19 AM, Tabitha McNerney <tabithamc at gmail.com>
wrote:

> Hello all --
>
> I would like to install the gnutar port version 1.2.0 on an Xserve running
> Leopard Server (10.5.x) and noticed that when attempting to install, the
> install failed. There is indeed a trouble ticket for gnutar version 1.19
> (ticket # 13462 regarding Leopard problems).
>
> Consulting the latest revision of the gnutar 1.20 Portfile (updated "1
> month ago"), I saw this interesting note:
>
> http://trac.macports.org/browser/trunk/dports/archivers/gnutar/Portfile
>
> version 1.20 with workaround for broken gcc-4.0 on 10.5: *beta gcc 4.2
>> needs to be installed*
>>
>
> and then the reference to gcc 4.2 at the tail of the Portfile:
>
> 48     platform darwin 9 {
>> 49             # gcc 4.0 fails to compile gnutar on 10.5 (probably will
>> get fixed with XCode 3.1)
>> 50             configure.compiler      gcc-4.2
>> 51     }
>>
>
> Leaving it to one's imagination, its not too difficult to fathom that some
> people who are Apple Developer Connection members might have early access to
> XCode 3.1 pre-release which may or may not included gcc 4.2. So, I looked at
> the MacPorts database and found two port options regarding gcc 4.2:
>
> 1.) The port named: *apple-gcc42*, version 5531 whose Portifle is at:
>
> http://trac.macports.org/browser/trunk/dports/lang/apple-gcc42/Portfile
>
> and I did noticed that the apple-gcc42's Portfile lists a Master site of:
>
> http://www.opensource.apple.com/darwinsource/tarballs/other/
>
> Indeed, a the URL above, I found the resource defined in the apple-gcc42
> Portfile named:
>
> *gcc_42-5531.tar.gz*
>
> So I downloaded it and looked at the file named "README.Apple" which has
> this header, excerpted:
>
> APPLE LOCAL file documentation
>>
>> This file describes Apple's version of GCC 4.x modified for Darwin /
>> Mac OS X.  Although Apple's stated policy is to contribute all of its
>> GCC work to the FSF GCC mainstream, at any given moment there will be
>> changes that are permanently unacceptable for FSF GCC, in need of
>> rework before acceptance, or that we simply aren't ready to send in.
>> This version of GCC contains all those changes.
>>
>> In keeping with provision 2a of the GPL, each Apple change is marked
>> with a comment saying "APPLE LOCAL", followed by optional words "begin",
>> "end", or "file", followed by a short phrase describing the change
>> generally ("AltiVec" for instance, if the change is related to AltiVec
>> support).
>>
>> BUILDING, THE APPLE WAY
>>
>
> And it goes on from there.
>
> 2.) The port named: *gcc42*, version 4.2.4 whose Portifle is at:
>
> http://trac.macports.org/browser/trunk/dports/lang/gcc42/Portfile
>
> Now taking the two options above: (1) apple-gcc42 or (2) gcc42, does it
> really matter which of these ports satisfies the gnutar's compiler
> configuration option for gcc 4.2 on darwin version 9.x (Mac OS X 10.5.x)? Is
> the apple-gcc42 source separate from what might be released by XCode 3.1? I
> guess that's really Apple's business as to what they release with XCode 3.1
> so it may be a moot point, so long as the resource is made separately
> available by Apple to the open source communities at large under GPL via
> opensource.apple.com
>
> What is the *best* *practice* suggested by the MacPorts community with
> respect to compilers? In other words, is it not more or less a
> chicken-and-egg situation -- before MacPorts (base) can be created, gcc must
> exist and if I am understanding correctly, the gcc version(s) that ship with
> XCode (3.0 being the current release and best suggestion). Granted, I could
> see that if someone was really paranoid they could download the gcc 4.2
> source (prior to MacPorts base installation) and make it separate from what
> comes with Xcode true? It wasn't until today, when I investigated this
> situation, that I first became aware that there is a port named apple-gcc42.
> I wonder if this port is indeed the suggested port to use for building
> gnutar 1.20 on a Leopard 10.5.x system?
>
> Thank you,
>
> Tabitha
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.macosforge.org/pipermail/macports-users/attachments/20080622/0bb33e55/attachment.htm