[cairo] problem building cairo 1.10.0 for x86_64 on Mac OS X 10.5 (Leopard)

[Kevin Layer]

Andrea Canciani <ranma42 at gmail.com> wrote:

>> On Wed, Nov 3, 2010 at 11:05 PM, Kevin Layer <layer at franz.com> wrote:
>> > Alexander Shulgin <alex.shulgin at gmail.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >>> On Tue, Nov 2, 2010 at 01:36, Kevin Layer <layer at franz.com> wrote:
>> >>> > I'm trying to build the universal version of gtk2, and in the process
>> >>> > it tries to build cairo and gets the following error.  Is this a known
>> >>> > problem?
>> >>> >
>> >>> > I have the latest Xcode for Leopard installed.  3.1.4.  The rest of
>> >>> > the system is up to date, as well.
>> >>>
>> >>> I have built cairo-1.10 on Snow Leopard (10.6.4) w/o a problem, both
>> >>> x64 and i386 variants.  So this might be a problem with your version
>> >>> of Xcode.  I'd try to check on the Apple developer site if there's any
>> >>> updates/knwown issues to that.
>> >
>> > I'm trying to build a universal binary with macports.  Clearly it
>> > doesn't work, and the macports guys say it's a cairo problem.  I
>> > really need a universal binary, and know of no other way to (easily)
>> > build it.
>> 
>> Can you check if building the i386 and the x86_64 versions separately
>> and later merging them works?
>> A good reference on how to merge the two builds is here:
>> 
>> http://developer.apple.com/library/mac/technotes/tn2005/tn2137.html#TNTAG3
>> 

And the response:

  Subject: Re: can't build cairo
  From: Ryan Schmidt <ryandesign at macports.org>
  Date: Fri, 5 Nov 2010 16:08:41 -0500
  Cc: macports-users at lists.macosforge.org
  Message-Id: <CFA0A5B7-F546-4CDF-80FA-51ED79802F3F at macports.org>
  To: Kevin Layer <layer at franz.com>

  The cairo port in MacPorts already does build for each architecture
  separately and then glue them together using lipo. In MacPorts this
  feature is called the muniversal portgroup. Based on what I've seen,
  cairo just does not appear to like building for x86_64 on
  Leopard. (I don't have an Intel Leopard test machine handy to verify
  that myself.)




>> >
>> > Isn't there anything more that can be done?
>> 
>> Please report the technote to the macports guys (and/or crosspost
>> me to them ;) ).
>> From what you're saying it looks like they assume that the configure
>> script will produce the same results for ppc32/ppc64/i386/x86_64.
>> To me this looks like a very strong assumption.
>> 
>> If they can point out what we should change to help them get a
>> universal binary, we can try to fix it in cairo.
>> 
>> Andrea