Curses... google ate my reply!  A summary of what I wrote:

1.  Doing some more testing with yesterday's version, I noticed that changing the order of x86_64 and i386 changed the architecture that the two libraries are built in (it builds whichever comes first).

2.  Today's version is progress!  (Yay!  Thanks!)  tinyxml and yaml-cpp are being built as x86_64 & i386 fat binaries!  However, now it's erroring out in ociobakelut, due to the following:

ld: warning: in /opt/local/lib/liblcms2.dylib, file was built for unsupported file format which is not the architecture being linked (i386)

I'm looking into this now...

Thanks!

Andrea

On Thursday, May 29, 2014 1:23:04 PM UTC-5, rmi...@... wrote:

It is fun to getting quoting rules right in cmake.  Please pull the git repo again and test again.

On Wednesday, May 28, 2014 11:27:29 AM UTC-7, rmi...@... wrote:

I have created a new CMakeLists.txt file but I currently do not have a way to test it.  If someone could please test the CMakeOSXArch branch on the rminsk/OpenColorIO repository (git clone -b CMakeOSXArch https://github.com/rminsk/OpenColorIO.git).

Thanks

On Monday, May 26, 2014 2:12:58 PM UTC-7, Andrea Mantler wrote:

I would like to build fat binaries with x86_64 and i386 architecture support.  I've tried passing the flag
    -DCMAKE_OSX_ARCHITECTURES=x86_64;i386
to cmake, but it appears that flag isn't being carried down to the building of libtinyxml.a and libyaml-cpp.a:

    ld: warning: in ../../ext/dist/lib/libtinyxml.a, file was built for unsupported file format which is not the architecture being linked (i386)
    ld: warning: in ../../ext/dist/lib/libyaml-cpp.a, file was built for unsupported file format which is not the architecture being linked (i386)

(Note:  I get the same errors if I try to build for just i386.)

Does anyone have any suggestions for what I can try?  Thanks!