Ryan Schmidt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on Tuesday, January 23, 2007 at 10:15 PM -0800 wrote: >> Port gd2 is at 2.0.33. If gd 1.x is no longer needed couldn't we just >> delete it and use the gd2 port? > >Aaaa! Yes, why was r21414 committed? I would have thought the point >of having a gd and a gd2 port was to keep the 1.x and 2.x series >separate. > >There may be some cases where programs that worked with gd1 won't >work with gd2, according to the gd faq: > >http://libgd.org/FAQ#Why_doesn. >27t_my_gd_1.x_program_work_well_with_gd_2.x.3F > >How do we discover which ports, if any, depend on gd? "port echo >depends_lib:gd" does not seem to work (produces an error).
I have found grepping portindex and such to give confusing results, maybe I just don't know the right method though. I just did a 'port deps all' and searched the output. I see no dependencies on gd 1.x at all and it seems unlikely there will be new ports depending on it. I think it is nukeworthy. Nuke! Nuke! Nuke! Nuke! Mark _______________________________________________ macports-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo/macports-dev
