This repository has been archived by the owner. It is now read-only.

povray 3.7.0.RC6 #15093

Closed
wants to merge 4 commits into
from

Conversation

Projects
None yet
5 participants
Contributor

royhodgman commented Sep 25, 2012

The previous version of povray (3.6.1) would not compile with recent versions of libpng. This beta version does compile with recent versions of libpng.

Almost all changes to this formula come from studying the povray portfile from MacPorts and reading a bug report about how they solved the same problem.

@royhodgman royhodgman povray 3.7.0.RC6
The previous version of povray (3.6.1) would not compile with recent versions of libpng. This beta version does compile with recent versions of libpng.

Almost all changes to this formula come from studying the [povray portfile][1] from MacPorts and reading [a bug report][2] about how they solved the same problem.

[1]: https://svn.macports.org/repository/macports/trunk/dports/graphics/povray/Portfile "MacPorts POV-Ray portfile"
[2]: https://trac.macports.org/ticket/35949 "MacPorts Ticket 35949"
b462570

As long as you're touching this, put homepage above url, thanks.

Owner

royhodgman replied Sep 25, 2012

done

un-indent these back a bit.

Owner

royhodgman replied Sep 25, 2012

and done

@royhodgman royhodgman small cosmetic changes
moved homepage above url
removed some spaces from patches section
fe9bacb

Is this not optional too?

Owner

royhodgman replied Sep 27, 2012

I thought it would have been optional, but there were build errors when it was not previously installed on my system.

They added a dependency on all of boost in 3.7.0? That sucks.

zlib is included with OSX; this shouldn't be needed.

Contributor

mistydemeo commented Sep 25, 2012

This doesn't build for me on 10.6:

/usr/bin/g++-4.2 -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I../..  -I../.. -I../../source -I../../source -I../../source/base -I../../unix -I../../vfe -I../../vfe/unix -I/usr/local/opt/libpng/include -pthread -I/usr/local/include  -pipe -Wno-multichar -Wno-write-strings -fno-enforce-eh-specs -s -O3 -ffast-math -Os -w -pipe -march=core2 -msse4 -mmacosx-version-min=10.6 -D_THREAD_SAFE -c -o hfield.o `test -f 'shape/hfield.cpp' || echo './'`shape/hfield.cpp
In file included from support/task.cpp:103:
../../source/backend/support/task.h:187: error: thread-local storage not supported for this target
Contributor

mistydemeo commented Sep 25, 2012

It looks like povray 3.7 is known not to build with gcc/llvm-gcc 4.2: http://news.povray.org/povray.beta-test/thread/%3Cweb.4d091fcd62af24a47800993b0@news.povray.org%3E/

That thread is 2 years old (and the provided patch no longer applies); a more recent Macports discussion indicates that the povray developers have no interest in making povray work on gcc 4.2: https://trac.macports.org/ticket/36172

Contributor

royhodgman commented Sep 27, 2012

So is there a way to construct a formula which will use 3.6.1 on 10.6 systems and 3.7.0.RC6 on 10.7 and 10.8 other than to create two different formulas?

Contributor

Sharpie commented Sep 27, 2012

Another possibility is to fail the formula unless Lion or newer is being used---Snow Leopard is support is going to ride into the sunset whenever 10.9 is released.

Contributor

royhodgman commented Oct 7, 2012

Now the formula should fail unless Lion or newer is being used.

I do not have a 10.6 machine, so I have not tested whether the added requirement on NeedsLion behaves as expected, but I copied the structure of the same requirement from the Nu formula, so I imagine it should.

Contributor

adamv commented Oct 21, 2012

Please squash to a single commit for review; not keen on losing Snow Leopard support yet I guess, but if it is an upstream issue not much we can do (other than "fix upstream".)

Contributor

adamv commented Oct 21, 2012

Note that MacPorts has patches, so we should look into that: https://trac.macports.org/browser/trunk/dports/graphics/povray/Portfile

Contributor

royhodgman commented Oct 21, 2012

I created a new pull request for the squashed commits: #15576.

The patches from MacPorts were included in the original commit in this pull request, and I don't see any new activity over there since the last time I worked on this formula.

Contributor

adamv commented Oct 28, 2012

Closing as a duplicate of #15576.

@adamv adamv closed this Oct 28, 2012

@xu-cheng xu-cheng locked and limited conversation to collaborators Feb 16, 2016

Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.