interval 0.1.1 released

[Marius Schamschula]

Michael,

I have since tried to rebuild interval 0.1.0 with the current octave-1.0.tcl, and it also fails. I don’t understand how it built cleanly little over a week ago and now fails.

On Feb 1, 2015, at 8:25 PM, Michael Dickens <michaelld at macports.org> wrote:

> I just put together a test Portfile for octave-interval. Looks like (somehow) the CFLAGS and LDFLAGS settings are being used. Seems like adding in some logic to the octave-1.0 PortGroup to remove "-arch" from the various configure *FLAGS should do the trick. If this is a change from the 0.1.0 release, then it's most likely "their bad" and probably nothing to do with MacPorts (meaning: MacPorts' settings for these flags has not changed, but the package's usage of the flags has). - MLD
>  
> On Sun, Feb 1, 2015, at 09:19 PM, Michael Dickens wrote:
>> octave-1.0.tcl only uses what is provided to it by octave itself via 'mkoctfile' (specifically the FLIBS and LAPACK_LIBS settings); it does nothing special or tricky along the way even if the way it handles building octave packages is nonstandard. Those settings should not contain '-arch' of any type. To be fair, it would be wise for the octave devs to add '-arch' parsing to mkoctfile, as it would solve a bunch of integration issues with OSX compilers; I think I looked into patching that parsing in once upon a time but I'm sure any work I did has been lost to time. But, they don't so we have to be careful to make sure that flag doesn't get saved or used somehow when doing octave packages. Is there an open ticket for adding in this port? Is there any difference beyond the version and checksums to the proposed Portfile between interval 0.1.0 and 0.1.1?
>  

Marius
--
Marius Schamschula




-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.macosforge.org/pipermail/macports-dev/attachments/20150201/65e5b314/attachment.html>