ld64 regressed?

["René J.V. Bertin"]

On Jun 04, 2014, at 20:51, Eric Gallager wrote:

> Isn't 236.3_1 the broken one that failed to build? How did you manage to get it installed in the first place?

I had an exchange (on here or via the bug tracker) and had even prepared my own patched portfile that version-locked to 136 on 10.6, but Jeremy pushed a patch very quickly that allowed v. 236 to build (with a minor version bump IIRC). I think there was even a binary build of it.
I didn't keep trace of what I did since the issue was resolved "upstream" ... now I regret.

Not that I have the slightest idea what we're missing out on, but newer should be better, right? :)

René