On May 29, 2009, at 04:32, [email protected] wrote:
Revision: 51616
http://trac.macports.org/changeset/51616
Author: [email protected]
Date: 2009-05-29 02:32:41 -0700 (Fri, 29 May 2009)
Log Message:
-----------
add x86_64 variant for 64bit version
+variant x86_64 description {Build 64 bit version} {
+ configure.cflags-append -m64
+ configure.cxxflags-append -m64
+ configure.fflags-append -m64
+ configure.ldflags-append -m64
+}
I don't see any code that would prevent someone from selecting this
on, say, a Power Mac G5. Would it work? If so, the name "x86_64"
would be wrong.
I don't think we've had any variants before that do what you're doing
here, switching from a 32-bit to 64-bit build. Though it is the
strategy I think we should be employing moving forward for universal
builds. As I wrote some time ago, I think ports should build only for
the 32-bit local arch by default as they do now, and there should be
a variant (probably a platform variant) to build only for the 64-bit
local arch, and we would have a PowerPC and an Intel build machine,
and each would build each port twice, once for 32-bit and once for 64-
bit, and the results of all four builds would be merged together. If
we employ this strategy, we may want to settle on a different variant
name than "x86_64".
_______________________________________________
macports-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/macports-dev
