> 1. What process/script creates all the packages for all the ports?  Where is 
> this documented?

Port does it itself, the archive and unarchive phases. The server-side scripts 
(don't forget autobuild project as well):
https://trac.macports.org/wiki/archives

> 2. The resulting packages are in what format?  .pkg?  .mpkg?  .deb?  .other?

tgz, tbz2, etc.
You can create installers using pkg and dmg, but those are a different topic.

> 3. Assuming that the packages are in an older format like .pkg or .mpkg, how 
> are dependencies being handled?  Is the metadata for dependencies expressed 
> somewhere external to the package collection such that a front-end 
> installation tool could install all of the deps without the user having to 
> know or care?  If we're avoiding this problem by using the .mpkg format, is 
> the assumption that we have so much disk space available that all of the 
> extra redundancy (and download costs) is not going to be a problem?

Dependencies are handled just like any others:
library and run deps are installed/built first. Since the binary distribution 
doesn't need the build_deps, they are skipped.  This is why I've had previously 
reported a lot of ports having their dependencies incorrect.

> 4. If you've been building all the ports since 1.9 came out, what's your 
> fail/success rate right now?  Is this data being captured somewhere?

http://lavergne.gotdns.org/macports/

The success rate? "Did it build?" If there's a ticket about a bad build against 
the port then chances are it didn't make a binary archive.

> 
> Those are just 4 issues off the top of my head - I'm sure I'll come up with 
> another 4 just as soon as I send this. :)

Attachment: smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature

_______________________________________________
macports-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/macports-dev

Reply via email to