cmake universal?

[Ryan Schmidt]

On Jul 3, 2014, at 7:04 AM, René J.V. Bertin wrote:

> 
> On Jul 03, 2014, at 13:43, Mojca Miklavec wrote:
> 
>> On Thu, Jul 3, 2014 at 11:45 AM, "René J.V. Bertin" wrote:
>>> Quick question: I have the universal cmake variant installed, and I fail to see the interest of that. Is there any way it could have been installed because another universal variant's build dependencies?
>> 
>> That's quite possible.
> 
> Is there a way to check which port(s) depend on a given variant of another port?

No. MacPorts base does not have the capability to depend on a variant of another port, only to depend on another port. See ticket #126.

The active_variants 1.1 portgroup's require_active_variants procedure is the closest thing we have to that capability right now, but because it is not part of the base functionality, you cannot run queries for ports using it.

>> Maybe we should add
>>   depends_skip_archcheck-append cmake
>> or something similar to the CMake PortGroup?
> 
> [OT]
> Also, about universal variants being pulled in (and what I think I'm observing actually on the binary package mirrors): lots of my universal ports were pulled in when I installed wine. I don't know the exact status of Wine64, but last time I checked it was still safer (in terms of compatibility) to use the 32bit wine version. I hope prebuilt universal ports aren't being discontinued for OS X 10.9 too quickly, under the assumption that no one is still running 32bit CPUs ...
> [/OT]

Yes, wine is still 32-bit, so it needs 32-bit versions of dependencies. If your machine is 64-bit, that means universal versions of dependencies will be used. I know of no plans to discontinue universal variants in MacPorts, and I would be opposed to such a change if someone were to propose it. There is not a separate universal variant buildslave, however if universal versions are needed by default (as is the case for wine) then the buildslaves will build those.