[MacPorts] #17972: RFE: Add a PortGroup with a different universal build mechanism
#17972: RFE: Add a PortGroup with a different universal build mechanism -----------------------------------+---------------------------------------- Reporter: mcalhoun@… | Owner: macports-tickets@… Type: enhancement | Status: new Priority: Normal | Milestone: MacPorts Future Component: base | Version: 1.7.0 Keywords: | Port: -----------------------------------+---------------------------------------- To facilitate the building of more 32/64-bit universal binaries,[[BR]] I would like to propose a PortGroup which builds the packages[[BR]] separately and then merges them together. It is intended to be an improvement of the [http://trac.macports.org/browser/trunk/base/src/port1.0/portutil.tcl#L2188 merge] function. -- Ticket URL: <http://trac.macports.org/ticket/17972> MacPorts <http://www.macports.org/> Ports system for Mac OS
#17972: RFE: Add a PortGroup with a different universal build mechanism -----------------------------------+---------------------------------------- Reporter: mcalhoun@… | Owner: mcalhoun@… Type: enhancement | Status: assigned Priority: Normal | Milestone: MacPorts Future Component: base | Version: 1.7.0 Keywords: | Port: -----------------------------------+---------------------------------------- Changes (by mcalhoun@…): * owner: macports-tickets@… => mcalhoun@… * status: new => assigned -- Ticket URL: <http://trac.macports.org/ticket/17972#comment:1> MacPorts <http://www.macports.org/> Ports system for Mac OS
#17972: RFE: Add a PortGroup with a different universal build mechanism -----------------------------------+---------------------------------------- Reporter: mcalhoun@… | Owner: mcalhoun@… Type: enhancement | Status: assigned Priority: Normal | Milestone: MacPorts Future Component: base | Version: 1.7.0 Keywords: | Port: -----------------------------------+---------------------------------------- Comment(by blb@…): Shouldn't this really be either used to improve {{{proc merge}}} or be another proc, instead of being a portgroup? Though being a port group does mean it can be added/updated without new MacPorts releases. -- Ticket URL: <http://trac.macports.org/ticket/17972#comment:2> MacPorts <http://www.macports.org/> Ports system for Mac OS
#17972: RFE: Add a PortGroup with a different universal build mechanism -----------------------------------+---------------------------------------- Reporter: mcalhoun@… | Owner: mcalhoun@… Type: enhancement | Status: assigned Priority: Normal | Milestone: MacPorts Future Component: base | Version: 1.7.0 Keywords: | Port: -----------------------------------+---------------------------------------- Comment(by mcalhoun@…): Replying to [comment:2 blb@…]:
Shouldn't this really be either used to improve {{{proc merge}}} or be another proc, instead of being a portgroup? Though being a port group does mean it can be added/updated without new MacPorts releases. As you say, the only reason was how quickly it could be refined, tested, and put into use.
Ports like cairo, openssl, and fftw-3 spend a fair amount of code trying to support universal builds.[[BR]] Their support is a little fragile due to the need to merge header files.[[BR]] So I see a strong need for a better merge capability. So far, I have only used merge_universal-1.0.tcl to build universal versions of gmp, libffi, and mpfr.[[BR]] No doubt further features are needed to be of general use.[[BR]] Using a PortGroup would allow faster refinement. As a side note, mpfr built using both universal mechanisms (-arch ... -arch ... and merging), but they produced different binaries[[BR]] due to a variable HAVE_LDOUBLE_IEEE_EXT_LITTLE. Perhaps it is bad policy to use a PortGroup this way, but it seemed better than waiting for the next version release. -- Ticket URL: <http://trac.macports.org/ticket/17972#comment:3> MacPorts <http://www.macports.org/> Ports system for Mac OS
#17972: RFE: Add a PortGroup with a different universal build mechanism ------------------------------------+--------------------------------------- Reporter: mcalhoun@… | Owner: mcalhoun@… Type: enhancement | Status: closed Priority: Normal | Milestone: MacPorts Future Component: base | Version: 1.7.0 Resolution: fixed | Keywords: Port: | ------------------------------------+--------------------------------------- Changes (by mcalhoun@…): * status: assigned => closed * resolution: => fixed Comment: Fixed in r45597. -- Ticket URL: <http://trac.macports.org/ticket/17972#comment:4> MacPorts <http://www.macports.org/> Ports system for Mac OS
#17972: RFE: Add a PortGroup with a different universal build mechanism ------------------------------------+--------------------------------------- Reporter: mcalhoun@… | Owner: mcalhoun@… Type: enhancement | Status: closed Priority: Normal | Milestone: MacPorts Future Component: base | Version: 1.7.0 Resolution: fixed | Keywords: Port: | ------------------------------------+--------------------------------------- Comment(by blb@…): Can the portgroup be merged into trunk now, I see the group itself hasn't had updates in a couple of weeks and the list of ports using it is increasing? Then we could also merge to the 1.7 branch and cut a 1.7.2 so it gets added quickly. -- Ticket URL: <http://trac.macports.org/ticket/17972#comment:5> MacPorts <http://www.macports.org/> Ports system for Mac OS
#17972: RFE: Add a PortGroup with a different universal build mechanism ------------------------------------+--------------------------------------- Reporter: mcalhoun@… | Owner: mcalhoun@… Type: enhancement | Status: closed Priority: Normal | Milestone: MacPorts Future Component: base | Version: 1.7.0 Resolution: fixed | Keywords: Port: | ------------------------------------+--------------------------------------- Comment(by mcalhoun@…): Replying to [comment:5 blb@…]:
Can the portgroup be merged into trunk now, I see the group itself hasn't had updates in a couple of weeks and the list of ports using it is increasing? Then we could also merge to the 1.7 branch and cut a 1.7.2 so it gets added quickly. Unfortunately, it can not be merged into the trunk because I have not gotten it to work correctly within the base code.[[BR]] I continue to work on it, and as soon as it is minimally functional, I will submit it.
The reason the list continues to grow is because I or one of my colleagues wanted a 32/64-bit universal of a library (or dependency) for our work.[[BR]] As I get them to work, I have been committing the results.[[BR]] If this is causing any type of problem, please let me know. -- Ticket URL: <http://trac.macports.org/ticket/17972#comment:6> MacPorts <http://www.macports.org/> Ports system for Mac OS
#17972: RFE: Add a PortGroup with a different universal build mechanism ------------------------------------+--------------------------------------- Reporter: mcalhoun@… | Owner: mcalhoun@… Type: enhancement | Status: closed Priority: Normal | Milestone: Component: ports | Version: 1.7.0 Resolution: fixed | Keywords: Port: | ------------------------------------+--------------------------------------- Changes (by jmr@…): * component: base => ports * milestone: MacPorts Future => -- Ticket URL: <http://trac.macports.org/ticket/17972#comment:7> MacPorts <http://www.macports.org/> Ports system for Mac OS
participants (1)
-
MacPorts