> On Feb 2, 2021, at 11:22 PM, Ryan Schmidt <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> On Feb 3, 2021, at 01:12, Ken Cunningham wrote:
>
>>> But if "his system will never see that port could be universal" then how
>>> could he "download and install that port +universal" in the first place?
>>
>> that is the crux of it, indeed.
>>
>> Should our poor soul, who cannot build the port +universal, still be able to
>> download it +universal from the buildbot and use it, if it exists (built by
>> the arm64 machine).
>
> At present, no, that would not be possible.
>
> I consider the buildbot a "nice to have". It makes life easier by
> precompiling things but it is not essential. When something is not available
> precompiled, MacPorts builds from source. If something doesn't build
> correctly from source, let's fix that.
>
OK — for users out there, then, we should begin to make it clear that building
+universal on a BigSur Intel machine is not going to work out for a number of
ports, and although they might find some ports can build universal on BigSur
Intel, for comprehensive +universal support, they should expect to use BigSur
arm64.
That is fine with me — IMHO nobody should really be putting anything out that
hasn’t been actually tried on an actual BigSur arm64 machine anyway.
But should be clear to people what to expect.
Ken
