; adding the major version only link as a consequence. Assuming it is here to
> stay then yes this is really now what we should be using I would say.
>
> Chris
>
>>
>> Nate
>>
>>> On May 12, 2021, at 2:27 AM, Ryan Schmidt wrote:
>>>
>>>
this is really now what we should be using I would say.
Chris
>
> Nate
>
>> On May 12, 2021, at 2:27 AM, Ryan Schmidt wrote:
>>
>> I notice that the Xcode 12.5 CLT (but not Xcode 12.5) now contains a
>> MacOSX11.sdk symlink pointing to the MacOSX11.3.sdk. If Ma
ect answer seems to be to use the symlink unless i'm missing something.
Nate
> On May 12, 2021, at 2:27 AM, Ryan Schmidt wrote:
>
> I notice that the Xcode 12.5 CLT (but not Xcode 12.5) now contains a
> MacOSX11.sdk symlink pointing to the MacOSX11.3.sdk. If MacPorts used
&g
I notice that the Xcode 12.5 CLT (but not Xcode 12.5) now contains a
MacOSX11.sdk symlink pointing to the MacOSX11.3.sdk. If MacPorts used
MacOSX11.sdk when available instead of the more-specific version number, it
would reduce some of the problems we have from baked-in SDK paths in some
ports
