On Saturday September 06 2014 13:10:40 Lawrence Velázquez wrote:

> > Hacking alert:
> > Par of me now wonders if I couldn't "simply" replace the system runtime(s) 
> > with the current MacPorts one(s) (C++ and/or libgcc_s). I suppose that has 
> > been tried?
> 
> I do not know if anyone has tried that. You're welcome to volunteer for 
> guinea pig duty.

Well, it works.

It took almost 3.5 hours to build libgcc+universal, and that of course only 
gave me an x86 universal binary. So I had to do

> lipo /usr/lib/libstdc++.6.0.9.dylib -thin ppc7400 -output 
> libstdc++.6.0.9.dylib
> lipo /opt/local/lib/libstdc++.6.dylib -thin i386 -output 
> libstdc++.6.0.20.i386.dylib
> lipo /opt/local/lib/libstdc++.6.dylib -thin x86_64 -output 
> libstdc++.6.0.20.x64.dylib
> sudo lipo -create libstdc++.6.0.* -output /usr/lib/libstdc++-mp.6.dylib
> sudo ln -s libstdc++-mp.6.dylib /usr/lib/libstdc++.6.dylib

It's a bit of a miracle, but apparently it's allowed to mix and match library 
versions in a single universal binary like that, and Rosetta clearly doesn't 
mind (my old Illustrator CS copy ran fine with the new libstdc++).

I presume it might be possible to build a ppc variant of libgcc as well, but if 
so that would bump the build time to over 4.5 hours, which is really 
disproportionate.

Who decides whether or not a universal variant binary port is made available 
via the buildbots? O:-)

R.
_______________________________________________
macports-users mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo/macports-users

Reply via email to