GCC44, GCC45, GCC46 - Whats the point?
gvibe06 at gmail.com
Tue Jun 15 14:21:09 PDT 2010
By making me believe I could, I meant it was not documented specifically
stating I couldn't...thereby leaving to much open for assumption. I'm
sorry, but I am one of those people that reads about a new feature in GCC or
some other Library (etc etc) and then out of curiosity tries to build
against the new code to see these new features in action.
For me ... simply being able to build/install GCC44 successfully tells me
that I should be able to use the new compiler as I see fit, and not as
Macports see's fit....but this is not the case, because even when forced,
Macports spews my favorite error.
On a side note, I noticed this today:
*$ ls /usr/include/c++/*
*4.0.0 4.2.1 4.4.2*
Does anyone know where this 4.4.2 folder came from? I certainly did not put
anything there, as it is a /usr/include folder I can only guess that Apple
Anyway ... its Beer:30. I'll check in later.
On Tue, Jun 15, 2010 at 4:37 PM, Ryan Schmidt <ryandesign at macports.org>wrote:
> On Jun 15, 2010, at 14:41, Jeff Singleton wrote:
> > Seriously...what is the point of even having gcc44, gcc45, gcc46 in
> Macports, if we can't even use the newest compilers inside of Macports?
> There are several points.
> One is that some software requires a GCC newer than that provided with
> Xcode. These ports can be told to use the specific newer gcc port they
> More often, software might require a fortran compiler. gfortran is part of
> the GNU compiler collection and thus of the gcc ports, but Apple does not
> provide it or any other fortran compiler in Xcode, so any port that needs
> gfortran must use a gcc port.
> > I mean, I spend the hours building it, because there are features and
> enhancements in gcc 4.4 that I would like to use in other apps. But, after
> waiting all this time for gcc44 to build, then searching for some way to
> force Macports to use the newly built compiler...I end up with the dreaded:
> "configure: error: C compiler cannot create executables" error.
> There are a variety of reasons why that might be the case. The config.log
> should tell you more specifically what's wrong.
> > ryandesign says forcing Macports to use a non-Xcode compiler is
> That's correct. We already don't do a very good job of testing our ports
> with the existing user-configurable options; adding more options to the mix
> (letting the user select a compiler) would decrease our effectiveness even
> > I don't expect this thread to go far, if at all. But I just wanted to
> state that it is useless, mind-numbing, and tediously unnecessary to make us
> believe we can build gcc44+ to use as the default compiler under Macports,
> when it just isn't possible to begin with.
> I don't think anybody here made you believe you could build MacPorts ports
> with any compiler you wanted; if you had asked here we would have told you
> the opposite is true.
Your HTML signature here
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the macports-users