Ben Greenfield wrote: > Hey All, > > I have been using MacPorts for years and the way I use it works because of > /opt/local/. If the notion of everything living under /opt/local went away > I would have to change my process.
I don't think anyone has suggested this. > I do my building on a single machine and rsync out the /opt/local/ results to > my clients. I have always considered it a great design and I want to > encourage maintaining the /opt/local/. If things were built and spread out > across the file tree my methods become more complicated. This also protects > my production /opt/local/ from MacPorts build process breaking. This doesn't change, if linking to /usr. >> Right. That's why it's been easier to use a totally separate tree, >> instead of making MacPorts do something that it doesn't want to do. >> >> But I guess you might as well be using a separate tool too, then... > > I don't know what you mean by doing something MacPorts doesn't want to do, > but I have my own port files for programs that don't exist in MacPorts. > I spend my time trying to get MacPorts to manage my install so that I don't > have to know about dependencies. The topic was reduce dependencies, by reusing more things from system. And for the reasons already listed, MacPorts doesn't want to do this... --anders _______________________________________________ macports-dev mailing list macports-dev@lists.macosforge.org http://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/macports-dev
