On Mon, Sep 14, 2009 at 07:22, Jack Howarth <[email protected]> wrote: > On Mon, Sep 14, 2009 at 10:11:39AM -0400, Eric Tiffany wrote: >> This Ars Techica thread has a survey about package managers on Snow Leopard, >> and an accompanying thread regarding some of these 64bit issues. >> >> http://episteme.arstechnica.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/8300945231/m/494000521041/showpollresults/Y > >> _______________________________________________ >> macports-dev mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/macports-dev > > Eric, > As I said in a couple threads this weekend, the smartest thing for > MacPorts to do is adopt the usage of the config.guess patch (that is being > evaluated by the config.guess maintainers) which I used to fix the gcc44 > package here (tickets 20838 and 21341). Assuming you don't want to bother > supporting i386 builds on Snow Leopard machines that are defaulting to > x86_64 code, this is the most transparent solution. The only alternative > is to resort to what fink does in their packaging, test the default > architecture with sysctl and then manually pass the --build/--host/--target > triplets to configure. > I told there are a number of other packages broken on Snow Leopard > in MacPorts because of the same issue. Does anyone have a list? I'll try > them locally with the config.guess patch and add or open tickets for that > fix.
Our current approach (passing -arch) seems to be working fine - I think both of your suggestions are bit heavy-handed considering *most* ports work just fine with -arch flags. - Toby _______________________________________________ macports-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/macports-dev
