[MacPorts] #31260: root 5.30.01 configure failure when file port is installed and xorg-libX11 is universal

[MacPorts]

#31260: root 5.30.01 configure failure when file port is installed and xorg-libX11
is universal
------------------------------------------+---------------------------------
 Reporter:  macsforever2000@…             |       Owner:  jonesc@…                
     Type:  defect                        |      Status:  new                     
 Priority:  Normal                        |   Milestone:                          
Component:  ports                         |     Version:  2.0.3                   
 Keywords:                                |        Port:  root                    
------------------------------------------+---------------------------------

Comment(by ryandesign@…):

 The purpose of MacPorts is to give users access to software that isn't
 already on their Mac, and newer versions of software that already is. In
 this case, the version of `file` included in Snow Leopard is version 5.03
 while the version in MacPorts is 5.08. Presumably 5.08 includes bug fixes,
 and the ability to detect new types of files. For some users that may
 outweigh the inability to deal with universal binaries.

 You might also ask: why do we provide ports for newer versions of gcc when
 they can't create universal binaries, which Apple's version can? The
 answer is sometimes you just need the capabilities of a newer version of
 gcc, and don't care about universal.

 And as I said it's not a problem exclusive to MacPorts users either. A
 user could have installed `file` using Fink, or Homebrew, or compiled it
 by hand.

 If we're trying to assign blame, there's plenty to go around. Why hasn't
 Apple contributed their universal patches back to the developers of
 `file`? Or if they have, why haven't the developers of `file` incorporated
 them? I don't know.

 We must resign ourselves to the reality that not all versions of the
 `file` command understand all binaries, so it might be best not rely on
 `file`, or at least to specify the full path to a presumed working version
 of it (`/usr/bin/file`). I'll attach a patch that does this, since it's
 probably the shortest patch for the problem.

 My recommendation to the developers of root would be to use `lipo -info`
 instead of `file`; that's what MacPorts uses internally. Then again, we've
 also had numerous inexplicable instances of users somehow replacing their
 `/usr/bin/lipo` commands with much older versions that don't understand
 64-bit binaries. It's really hard to anticipate all the ways a user can
 screw up their computer.

-- 
Ticket URL: <https://trac.macports.org/ticket/31260#comment:12>
MacPorts <http://www.macports.org/>
Ports system for Mac OS