Michael, I have since tried to rebuild interval 0.1.0 with the current octave-1.0.tcl, and it also fails. I don’t understand how it built cleanly little over a week ago and now fails.
On Feb 1, 2015, at 8:25 PM, Michael Dickens <[email protected]> wrote: > I just put together a test Portfile for octave-interval. Looks like (somehow) > the CFLAGS and LDFLAGS settings are being used. Seems like adding in some > logic to the octave-1.0 PortGroup to remove "-arch" from the various > configure *FLAGS should do the trick. If this is a change from the 0.1.0 > release, then it's most likely "their bad" and probably nothing to do with > MacPorts (meaning: MacPorts' settings for these flags has not changed, but > the package's usage of the flags has). - MLD > > On Sun, Feb 1, 2015, at 09:19 PM, Michael Dickens wrote: >> octave-1.0.tcl only uses what is provided to it by octave itself via >> 'mkoctfile' (specifically the FLIBS and LAPACK_LIBS settings); it does >> nothing special or tricky along the way even if the way it handles building >> octave packages is nonstandard. Those settings should not contain '-arch' of >> any type. To be fair, it would be wise for the octave devs to add '-arch' >> parsing to mkoctfile, as it would solve a bunch of integration issues with >> OSX compilers; I think I looked into patching that parsing in once upon a >> time but I'm sure any work I did has been lost to time. But, they don't so >> we have to be careful to make sure that flag doesn't get saved or used >> somehow when doing octave packages. Is there an open ticket for adding in >> this port? Is there any difference beyond the version and checksums to the >> proposed Portfile between interval 0.1.0 and 0.1.1? > Marius -- Marius Schamschula
_______________________________________________ macports-dev mailing list [email protected] https://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo/macports-dev
