Anyone have any thoughts on this? Maybe a way to build for 10.4, without adding the '-arch' commands?
thanks Tim ---- Timothy Lee <[email protected]> wrote: > So here is the issue... > I can't compile universal. The project that I'm building for includes > too many macports ports and I can't get all of the macports to > successfully install. > > I DO have a 10.4 PPC machine that has successfully built everything > that I need (obviously with no args added, its targeting 10.4). > I want to build a 10.4 i386 build on my leopard i386 machine. > When this is complete, I'll 'lipo' together all pieces of each > individual tree (using mozilla's 'unify' script). > > I have tried adding +universal to my variants.conf and changing my > macports.conf to universal_target to 10.4, universal_sysroot to the > 10.4 sdk, and universal_archs to ONLY i386 (as per your suggestion). > Unfortunately this didn't work (too many assumptions in macports > regarding the +universal variant and having at least two archs present). > > So now my only option is to explicitly drive into macports my CFLAGS, > LDFLAGS, and most importantly my MACOSX_DEPLOYMENT_TARGET vars. > > Is it possible to 'pass in' this information to macports? > > > Thanks > Tim > > On Feb 3, 2009, at 10:34 PM, Joshua Root wrote: > > > Timothy Lee wrote: > >> Is it possible to 'pass in' environment variables to the 'port > >> install' > >> command? > >> > >> Or is the only way to pass something like CFLAGS to macports is > >> through > >> a portfile? > >> > >> For example... I would like to > >> $sudo port install pan2 CFLAGS="-isysroot /Developers/SDKs/ > >> MacOSX10.4u.sdk" > >> > >> thoughts? > > > > Why do you need to set the sysroot? The universal_sysroot setting from > > macports.conf will be used when building with the universal variant, > > and > > when building non-universal an SDK shouldn't be needed. If pan2 does > > need it for some reason, then it should be added in the portfile. > > > > It is *possible* to tell MP to use arbitrary parts of your > > environment, > > but it's almost certainly a bad idea. > > > > - Josh > > _______________________________________________ > macports-users mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/macports-users _______________________________________________ macports-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/macports-users
