Adding configure options when installing a port

Stephen Langer stephen.langer at
Thu Jun 17 11:59:33 PDT 2010

On Jun 17, 2010, at 2:44 PM, Ryan Schmidt wrote:

> On Jun 16, 2010, at 19:31, Stephen Langer wrote:
>> Therefore it's a serious mistake for a packaging system to assume that it's ok to enable openmp in libraries.   A quick solution would be to provide both openmp and no-openmp variants, which would make users choose between fast stand-alone ImageMagick programs and libraries that can be linked by threaded apps.
> We don't need two variants; we only need one variant, "openmp", which the user can either enable or disable.

That's what I meant.  I guess I was using the word "variant" in a nontechnical sense.

>  It just remains a question as to whether the variant should be enabled by default or not. What I'm hearing is that we should disable it by default.

That would break the least amount of code.

>> A better solution might be for the openmp and non-openmp versions of the libraries to have different names, so that both could be installed on the same system.
> Ugh. That sounds nasty.

I agree.  Can we get ImageMagick to allow openMP to be enabled or disabled at run time?  That would also solve the problem.   Such a switch doesn't exist at the moment, as far as I can tell.

  -- Steve

-- stephen.langer at                    Tel: (301) 975-5423 --
--   Fax: (301) 975-3553 --
-- NIST, 100 Bureau Drive, Stop 8910, Gaithersburg, Md 20899-8910 --

-- "I don't think this will work.  That's why it's science."      --
--                     Naomi Langer (age 6),  17 Feb 2003         --

More information about the macports-users mailing list