[54368] trunk/base/src/port1.0

Marcus Calhoun-Lopez mcalhoun at macports.org
Sun Jul 26 16:27:58 PDT 2009

Ryan Schmidt <ryandesign at ...> writes:

> On Jul 25, 2009, at 12:03, mcalhoun at ... wrote:
> > Revision: 54368
> >           http://trac.macports.org/changeset/54368
> > Author:   mcalhoun at ...
> > Date:     2009-07-25 10:03:12 -0700 (Sat, 25 Jul 2009)
> > Log Message:
> > -----------
> Wait, what? In this commit I see you adding CPATH and LIBRARY_PATH  
> but I don't see you deleting the -I and -L stuff. I thought it was an  
> either/or thing -- either you use -I and -L or you use CPATH and  
> LIBRARY_PATH. Is that not right? How does it all interact if you use  
> all of them at once like this? How did you find that this is better  
> than the other proposal of changing -I to -isystem?
> http://lists.macosforge.org/pipermail/macports-dev/2009-April/ 
> 008148.html

I do not think there is any harm in having both -I,-L and
I have not found any problems at least.

I did not delete -I${prefix}/include and -L${prefix}/lib because something
similar caused problems with qt4-mac (see r54186), and I was afraid it
might have broken other packages which have their own build programs.

I used CPATH instead of -isystem because, as for as I know, there is no matching
-lsystem which would appends to the library search path like -isystem appends
to the include search paths.
CPATH on the other hand has an equivalent LIBRARY_PATH.


More information about the macports-dev mailing list