On 2010-01-22, at 4:20 PM, Scott Haneda wrote:
> I will be installing all my ports new and clean.
I have been struggling with the same general questions as Scott and only hoping
them to remain a reflection an asynchronous community's transition to x86_64
where many ports -- whether for reasons of portfile configuration or deeper
limitations -- can only run in 32-bit.
> In macports.conf I see:
> # CPU architecture to compile for. Defaults to i386 or ppc on Mac OS X 10.5
> # and earlier, depending on the CPU type detected at runtime. On Mac OS X
> 10.6
> # the default is x86_64 if the CPU supports it, i386 otherwise.
> #build_arch i386
The build_arch appears commented-out to allow for what are (contended to be)
usually-suitable defaults.
I too use a MacBook and account of the following line for me returns EFI32
ioreg -l -p IODeviceTree | awk -F'"' '/firmware-abi/{print $4}'
I am wondering if it means that --- despite that I am running 10.6 -- my ports
will only build i386 anyway so I wonder whether the admonitions to build
universal (under Snow Leopard) as x86_64 i386 are, for me and people running
similar machines, simply a waste of time. Unless what it is, is that Snow
Leopard through "Apple Magic" is able to run 64-bit applications despite that
the processor is unable to run a 32-bit kernel and whether that is the reason
it still makes sense to compile x86_64 under a limited processor. But the
x86_64 will be insufficient for some depedent ports if they had been either
unable to also be compiled under 64-bit, or happened not to be.
> I am still at a loss as to what is generating the "Variants: darwin_10,
> universal" line.
Evidently a portfile's "platform(s)" even despite absence from the portfile's
"variants" clauses get treated in the MacPorts web site listing (I am not sure
about the guide) as a "variant" despite that if you would specify in the port
command line, you get chastised by the console as well as on-list by the
non-newbies :-)
> # machine architectures
> universal_archs x86_64 i386
Based on my own attempts to learn mainly from Ryan's answers, :-)
- I think universal_archs is not enough by itself... it is accessed on demand
when explicitly asked for in the command line whether by +universal or
sudo port upgrade --enforce-variants installed +universal
or (in variants.conf, to make it automatic when possible) add
+universal
except when circumvented by a portfile usage of
"use_configure no" – see macports ticket 12170
or
"universal_variant no"
and (I think) extraneous to those portgroups (e.g. cmake, xcode) which provide
their own universal variants.
_______________________________________________
macports-users mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/macports-users
