At 17:01 -0400 7/4/09, Brandon Allbery wrote: > On Jul 4, 2009, at 11:15 , Rainer Müller wrote: > I read that as "relocatable" in the object/symbol table sense > (which I'm not sure applies to PPC).
Strictly speaking, it may not. What I was thinking about, in any case, was the issue of linking compiler output files (eg, foo.o) with libraries (eg, bar.a) to produce executable binary images (eg, foo). I don't really care if MacPorts supports cross-compilation, let alone produces universal binaries. The key issue is whether the user gets a WTF experience after moving (and even using, for a while) the /opt tree. A really simple solution would be for the port command to look at the current architecture type, compare it to what it expects, and issue a simple nastygram if it differs. Like: Cannot mix ppc and x86 architectures - bailing out... -r -- http://www.cfcl.com/rdm Rich Morin http://www.cfcl.com/rdm/resume [email protected] http://www.cfcl.com/rdm/weblog +1 650-873-7841 Technical editing and writing, programming, and web development _______________________________________________ macports-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/macports-users
