On Mar 21, 2012, at 11:59, Joshua Root wrote:
> On 2012-3-22 03:15 , Ryan Schmidt wrote:
>>
>> On Mar 21, 2012, at 10:39, [email protected] wrote:
>>
>>> * A frameworks_dir and applications_dir are associated with each group of
>>> sites as well as a prefix; sites are excluded when they don't match the
>>> current values
>>
>> This addresses:
>>
>> https://trac.macports.org/ticket/31186
>>
>> Although it looks like the way it addresses it is that I can never use
>> archives anymore, since I use a non-standard applications_dir, even though
>> most of the ports I install do not use applications_dir. I had been hoping
>> that that restriction could be avoided, though I'm not sure how it would be
>> accomplished.
>
> You could always use the config file to change the applications_dir
> associated with macports_distfiles if you want to go back to the old
> behaviour.
I don't, really; I agree the old behavior was wrong. But the new behavior is
more restrictive than it needs to be. If it were possible to let me use
archives for those ports that don't use applications_dir, that would be ideal.
But I'm not sure how, since the determination of whether something will end up
in applications_dir can't really be made until after the port has destrooted,
or after we look into the downloaded archive. Perhaps we could put an access
trace on the applications_dir variable; if it's accessed by the portfile, then
assume a file will end up installed there.
Alternately, do we have any interest in changing the default applications_dir
to ${prefix}/Applications (keeping a symlink to that in /Applications/MacPorts)?
_______________________________________________
macports-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/macports-dev
