On Jan 23, 2010, at 16:49, Scott Haneda wrote: > On Jan 23, 2010, at 1:51 PM, Ryan Schmidt wrote: > >> I advocated putting +universal in variants.conf on Snow Leopard and up. But >> then I tried it out myself and found too many ports that fail when built >> universal for x86_64/i386. Therefore I cannot advocate this change at this >> time. It would cause too much confusion for users. > > If Apache2, MySql5, php5 plus ahandful if common modules used fir local dev > is my main goal. > > A few other ports like mtr, and some perl foo here and there, how do you feel > life will be for me with +universal?
Go for it if you want. They seem to build universal for me. > In the past you said you didnot advocate building with intention of sharing > binaries across machines. Understood. That being the case, why bother with > any of this, just default to +universal, if it fails, clean and -universal. > Is that correct? Why bother with any of what? Yes, if a universal build fails, you should probably clean and try again non-universal. The inconvenience comes if you have +universal in your variants.conf, because if you then have to bypass a malfunctioning universal variant with -universal in order to install, you have to remember to do so every subsequent time you upgrade the port to a newer version, too. _______________________________________________ macports-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/macports-users
