Massive PORTS_REVISION bump after making gcc-9.1 default

[Mark Millard]

Kevin Oberman rkoberman at gmail.com wrote on
Sun Jul 28 17:21:00 UTC 2019 :

> I used "portmaster -a". The problem is that all ports compiled with gcc had
> PORTREVISION bumped. Most do not have a run-time dependency on gcc.

Going in  different direction than other responses
that I saw . . .

# pkg info gcc9
gcc9-9.1.0
. . .
Shared Libs provided:
	libcc1.so.0
	libssp.so.0
	libobjc.so.4
	libcc1plugin.so.0
	libstdc++.so.6
	libitm.so.1
	libgcc_s.so.1
	libquadmath.so.0
	libcp1plugin.so.0
	liblto_plugin.so.0
	libgomp.so.1
	libatomic.so.1
	libgfortran.so.5
. . .

# ls -c1 /usr/local/lib/gcc9/*.so
/usr/local/lib/gcc9/libatomic.so
/usr/local/lib/gcc9/libcc1.so
/usr/local/lib/gcc9/libgcc_s.so
/usr/local/lib/gcc9/libgfortran.so
/usr/local/lib/gcc9/libgomp.so
/usr/local/lib/gcc9/libitm.so
/usr/local/lib/gcc9/libobjc.so
/usr/local/lib/gcc9/libquadmath.so
/usr/local/lib/gcc9/libssp.so
/usr/local/lib/gcc9/libstdc++.so

Anything linked with any of those .so libraries does
have a runtime (library) dependency on gcc9, even if
it does not run a gcc9/gcc9++ compiler.

How many libraries and programs in ports are
compiled/built by gcc9 but that do not use any of those
.so libraries? (This may be roughly: how many have a
static-linking context?)

===
Mark Millard
marklmi at yahoo.com
( dsl-only.net went
away in early 2018-Mar)