Interesting survey on Snow Leopard package managers

Jack Howarth howarth at
Mon Sep 14 14:33:14 PDT 2009

On Mon, Sep 14, 2009 at 02:30:49PM -0700, Toby Peterson wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 14, 2009 at 14:28, Jeremy Lavergne
> <jeremy at> wrote:
> >> I don't think you're understanding me at all. If a project updates its
> >> config.guess and things work fine with the new output, that's fine.
> >> However, changing MacPorts base would have many unexpected effects
> >> that we'd be better off avoiding.
> >>
> >> Furthermore, I can say with a straight face that's it's ok for
> >> config.guess to return whatever it wants, because it usually makes no
> >> difference. It does for some ports, but not for most.
> >
> > It sounds like the change does nothing more than allow for 64bit to be built
> > correctly on the 32bit kernel of SL.
> >
> > Is that a good summary for what's going on?
> For the third time, the kernel architecture has absolutely nothing to
> do with this, as 'uname -p' returns i386 for both K32 and K64.
> - Toby

Exactly and the point of the config.guess patch is to decouple
the guessed architecture from uname and to rely instead on
the default code generation of the system compiler or on the
default code execution if a system compiler isn't installed.
Ben wants to make config.guess less dependent on a compiler
being installed.

More information about the macports-dev mailing list