Attached is my current portfile which builds both a static archive and dynamic library.
Portfile
Description: Binary data
patch-taucs-build.diff
Description: Binary data
The last thing to do is build the example programs that can be used to test Tarcs: #for the second pass through WRKSRC_SHARED, use a nonexistent MAKEOBJDIR to 71 #prevent make from entering the obj subdirectories and breaking the build (see, 72 #for example, the description of .OBJDIR in make(1)): 73 (cd ${WRKSRC}_SHARED && \ 74 ${SETENV} ${MAKE_ENV} MAKEOBJDIR="${NONEXISTENT}" \ 75 ${MAKE} ${_MAKE_JOBS} ${MAKE_ARGS} ${BINS:S|^|bin/FreeBSD/|}) which corresponds to $(DIREXE)direct$(EXEEXT): $(STDDEPS) $(DIROBJ)direct$(OBJEXT) $(DIRLIB)libtaucs$(LIBEXT) $(LD) $(LDFLAGS) \ $(LOUTFLG)$(DIREXE)direct$(EXEEXT) \ $(DIROBJ)direct$(OBJEXT) \ -L$(DIRLIB) -ltaucs \ $(LIBS) $(DIREXE)taucs_run$(EXEEXT): $(STDDEPS) $(DIROBJ)taucs_run$(OBJEXT) $(DIRLIB)libtaucs$(LIBEXT) $(LD) $(LDFLAGS) \ $(LOUTFLG)$(DIREXE)taucs_run$(EXEEXT) \ $(DIROBJ)taucs_run$(OBJEXT) \ -L$(DIRLIB) -ltaucs \ $(LIBS) $(DIREXE)iter$(EXEEXT): $(STDDEPS) $(DIROBJ)iter$(OBJEXT) $(DIRLIB)libtaucs$(LIBEXT) $(LD) $(LDFLAGS) \ $(LOUTFLG)$(DIREXE)iter$(EXEEXT) \ $(DIROBJ)iter$(OBJEXT) \ -L$(DIRLIB) -ltaucs \ $(LIBS) in the makefile. They set a nonexistent directory using OBJDIR with BSD make. Gnu make does not have this option, does it? It seems rediculus to have to build the library each time. Can I issue these with ‘system', omitting the library object? Mark Brethen mark.bret...@gmail.com > On Nov 26, 2018, at 11:45 AM, Ryan Schmidt <ryandes...@macports.org> wrote: > > > > On Nov 26, 2018, at 10:51, Mark Brethen wrote: > >> On Nov 26, 2018, at 10:39 AM, Ryan Schmidt wrote: >> >>> For example, I see here that they make a copy of the configured source >>> directory so that they can build libtaucs.a "normally" in the first >>> directory and then with position-independent code in the second directory >>> so that a shared library can be created from it. >> >> You are referring to the $(PICFLAG) variable in the second build? > > Yes. > >> I wondered about that, and had read that it wasn’t necessary for Mac OSX? > > Yes. PIC is on by default on macOS. >