64bit variant naming scheme

[Bryan Blackburn]

On Tue, Dec 09, 2008 at 06:10:48AM +1100, Joshua Root said:
> Toby Peterson wrote:
> > On Sun, Dec 7, 2008 at 6:59 PM, Bryan Blackburn <blb at macports.org> wrote:
> >> Currently there are only a few ports with 64bit variants:
> >>
> >>  nbench-byte +use_64_bit
> >>  ubench +use_64_bit
> >>  judy +bit64
> >>  john-devel +use_64_bit
> >>
> >> (john-devel was updated with 64bit support by me, picking the more common
> >> name).
> >>
> >> Before there are many more ports with such variants, we need to decide on a
> >> standard name; I found that +64bit isn't liked by port as it thinks that is
> >> the name of a port, not a variant so I guess it doesn't like a variant name
> >> to start with a number.
> >>
> >> The only issue I have with +use_64_bit is it's long and a pain to type...
> > 
> > Seems like a rather inappropriate use of variants in the first place.
> > 64bit-related build foo should simply be applied if the port is being
> > built 64bit (via universal_archs or other method).
> 
> Right, the reason I added those variants to nbench-byte and ubench was
> simply so they could be built 64-bit with MP 1.6. With 1.7, it seems
> like universal_archs and configure.m64 should take care of the issue
> between them.

So if someone wants to have 64bit support from a port, they'll need to build
it +universal?  This would have to require people adding the requisite
setting to universal_archs in macports.conf as well right, since trunk still
specifies only 'ppc i386'?

Also, what about ports where building 64bit is easier than universal, if
there are such ports?

Bryan


> 
> - Josh