#43614: mupdf @1.4 update --------------------------+-------------------------------- Reporter: starkhalo@… | Owner: macports-tickets@… Type: update | Status: reopened Priority: Normal | Milestone: Component: ports | Version: 2.2.1 Resolution: | Keywords: haspatch Port: mupdf | --------------------------+-------------------------------- Comment (by starkhalo@…): Replying to [comment:6 ryandesign@…]:
Replying to [comment:5 starkhalo@…]:
Replying to [comment:4 ryandesign@…]:
So how did you decide to remove the `platform darwin 8` block? Should I put that block back? I removed it because I had no way to test it.
Well, that block was added to fix a build failure reported on Tiger in #33240. So unless something has changed, the block may still be necessary. I'll test on Tiger shortly and let you know.
Also, you removed the code that caused the port to use `-arch` flags, so now it doesn't anymore. That needs to be put back. And a universal variant added, if possible. So those are the arch flags you mentioned are required for all ports without configure? I'll put them back as well as on the other port submissions then.
All ports that build architecture-specific software (and don't just install text files) should use `-arch` flags. If a port uses an unusual build system, then you have to add code to add those flags manually, i.e. by running `[get_canonical_archflags]` and putting its value wherever the build system understands it.
Ok, so after reading #33240 I put back the `darwin 8` code, I really doubt it's going to build without it. Also did a healthy read on Portfiles examples in the source tarballs regarding `use_configure no` and `[get_canonical_flags]`, I've put them back in the patch along with an empty `variant universal` which built fine on my end, though I still have to look at examples on it since the documentation is severely lacking. Also, the patch was made against r119826 -- Ticket URL: <https://trac.macports.org/ticket/43614#comment:8> MacPorts <http://www.macports.org/> Ports system for OS X