Change default compiler variant from +gcc45 to +gcc47

[larryv (Lawrence Velázquez)]

If #33544 was the sequel to #20103, then this makes it a trilogy. Prequels are in the works.

This patch adds +gcc46 and +gcc47 variants to those ports that don’t already have them and changes the default to +gcc47 in those ports that set a default. In the few ports that don’t provide variants, it changes the dependency from port:gcc43 or port:gcc45 to port:gcc47.

• If this isn’t appropriate for your port(s), say something.
• If GCC 4.7 causes problems for your port(s), say something.
• If I made a typo somewhere or didn’t switch your port(s) over to [+]gcc47 properly, say something.
• If I accidentally added +gcc46 to a port that needs GCJ, say something because gcc46 currently doesn’t include GCJ. I tried to keep an eye out for this, but swig-gcj was the only one I noticed.
• If you just want to say hello, say something. Or not.

[cooljeanius (Eric Gallager)]

Cc Me!

[cooljeanius (Eric Gallager)]

In the few ports that don’t provide variants, it changes the dependency from port:gcc43 or port:gcc45 to port:gcc47.

Could these ports get changed to having compiler variants like the rest of the ports?

[ryandesign (Ryan Carsten Schmidt)]

From the patch, those ports are:

• lua-numlua: the compiler to use needs to be updated in the patch file. Yes, this could be changed so that variants could be added (placeholder in patchfile; reinplace in portfile)
• offlinefs: I'm unable to determine why this port depends on gcc4* at all
• p5-extutils-f77: the patch was already updated to use 4.7, and it too could be changed so that variants could be added
• apbs: yes variants could be added
• apbs-mpi: I'm unable to determine why this port depends on gcc4* at all
• ccpnmr: the patch needs to be updated with the new compiler; yes variants could be added
• ds9: yes variants could be added
• lanHEP: yes variants could be added
• libxc: yes variants could be added
• pdb2pqr: yes variants could be added

[michaelld (Michael Dickens)]

I just did octave-devel in r103536, along with some other minor changes that needed to be added anyway.

[michaelld (Michael Dickens)]

Cc Me!

[mf2k (Frank Schima)]

py-usadel1 done in r103538.

[jmroot (Joshua Root)]

To quote myself in #33544:

It's best if this happens all at once, as otherwise new installs will tend to get multiple gcc versions during the transition.

[lpsinger (Leo Singer)]

ds9 is broken. I will change the compiler to gcc47 once it is fixed.

[dmeliza@…]

jags appears to compile and run fine on gcc47 (tested on i386 Snow Leopard)

[Romendakil]

whizard works with 4.7. From the next version we wanted to change it into the default compiler anyhow.

[anddam (Andrea D'Amore)]

Cc Me!

[kjellpk (Kjell Konis)]

Bug #38249 has patches containing version bumps for the R and R-framework (missing from the list of ports for this bug btw) ports and also switches the default compiler to gcc47.

[larryv (Lawrence Velázquez)]

Regarding variant-less ports:

• lanHEP: Variants added in r103605.
• p5-extutils-f77: Updated with variants in r103606.
• libxc: Variants submitted for consideration in #38260.
• apbs, ccpnmr, pdb2pqr: Variants submitted for consideration in #38261.
• lua-numlua: #38247 will remove the dependency on GCC altogether.
• ds9: Broken as per comment:8; will let maintainer handle it.

What should we do about offlinefs and apbs-mpi? I don’t want to bother adding variants if they don’t need them.

[larryv (Lawrence Velázquez)]

Just adding R-framework. Also accepting my own ticket.

[larryv (Lawrence Velázquez)]

second iteration, after adding variants to several ports

[larryv (Lawrence Velázquez)]

Update:

• The latest versions of apbs (r104099) and apbs-mpi (r104106) do not require GCC at all.
• I’ve closed #38261, adding variants to ccpnmr (r104107) and pdb2pqr (r104108).
• I’ve closed #38260, updating libxc and adding variants (r104109).
• I’m just going to update offlinefs to require gcc47 and not bother with variants.

New diff attached.

[cooljeanius (Eric Gallager)]

Why is offlinefs the only one that doesn't have compiler variants now? I'd say either add compiler variants to it, or remove the gcc4* dependency entirely, because, as Ryan said, it's unclear how the port even uses gcc4* at all.

[larryv (Lawrence Velázquez)]

Replying to egall@…:

Why is offlinefs the only one that doesn't have compiler variants now? I'd say either add compiler variants to it, or remove the gcc4* dependency entirely, because, as Ryan said, it's unclear how the port even uses gcc4* at all.

I’m not going to add variants just to swap build dependencies. Nor am I going to install fuse4x just to test whether offlinefs builds correctly without GCC present. If you or anyone else wants to verify that GCC is unnecessary, I’d be more than happy to remove the dependency.

[cooljeanius (Eric Gallager)]

main.log for my most recent rebuild of offlinefs on Lion

[cooljeanius (Eric Gallager)]

Replying to larryv@…:

Replying to egall@…:

Why is offlinefs the only one that doesn't have compiler variants now? I'd say either add compiler variants to it, or remove the gcc4* dependency entirely, because, as Ryan said, it's unclear how the port even uses gcc4* at all.

I’m not going to add variants just to swap build dependencies. Nor am I going to install fuse4x just to test whether offlinefs builds correctly without GCC present. If you or anyone else wants to verify that GCC is unnecessary, I’d be more than happy to remove the dependency.

Rebuilt offlinefs and attached my main.log from it. I'm currently on Lion, and it just used clang anyway, so I'd say the dependency could be removed.

[larryv (Lawrence Velázquez)]

Replying to egall@…:

Rebuilt offlinefs and attached my main.log from it. I'm currently on Lion, and it just used clang anyway, so I'd say the dependency could be removed.

r104213.

[cooljeanius (Eric Gallager)]

Replying to larryv@…:

Replying to egall@…:

Rebuilt offlinefs and attached my main.log from it. I'm currently on Lion, and it just used clang anyway, so I'd say the dependency could be removed.

r104213.

Ok, I rebuilt after this and can confirm that it worked.

[larryv (Lawrence Velázquez)]

Replying to egall@…:

Ok, I rebuilt after this and can confirm that it worked.

Well that really is fascinating, because it failed on all three buildbots.

​https://build.macports.org/builders/buildports-snowleopard-x86_64/builds/15895
​https://build.macports.org/builders/buildports-lion-x86_64/builds/9402
​https://build.macports.org/builders/buildports-mtln-x86_64/builds/3245

In any case, this is off-topic now. #38460.

[larryv (Lawrence Velázquez)]

Alright, these changes have overstayed their welcome in my tree. Committed in r104220. Thanks for coming, you’ve been a great audience.

[blair (Blair Zajac)]

Should we do something similar for gcc48 now that 4.8.0 is out?

[ryandesign (Ryan Carsten Schmidt)]

If so, it would be a new ticket, but if you believe this should be done, then you should begin by making a case for it on the mailing list.