On 2012-04-11 13:05, Elmar Stellnberger wrote: > It would be very nice if macports supported to compile a certain set > of base packages > without having to install the full bloated Xcode environment (which > consumes too much > disk space on my computer).
The directory /Applications/Xcode.app takes up merely 1.6 GB on my machine. I think this amount of disk space is acceptable. Is this really a problem for you? > Kenneth Reitz`s homebrew gcc would to my mind be a > good light-weight alternative. Mind that this package is not a legal distribution of the software as it violates the license agreement [1] which comes with the Developer Tools. The license does not grant the right to redistribute a modified version. In case the user produces the subset locally on their own machine, then this could be legal as it is not a redistribution. > It is very annoying that many packages > compile well but > then just fail on installation like gcc47 and darwinbuild. > autobuild, apple-gcc42 and mc are doing well yet, on the other hand. gcc47 is a pre-release and might fail for some other reason. What kind of build errors did you experience? What was missing compared to a a regular Xcode installation? The main problem for supporting such a lighter set of dependencies with regard to the Developer Tools would be to track which ports require what parts of Xcode/Developer Tools, as currently these are implied for all ports. Rainer [1] http://images.apple.com/legal/sla/docs/xcode.pdf _______________________________________________ macports-dev mailing list macports-dev@lists.macosforge.org http://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/macports-dev