On Sep 18, 2013, at 10:45 PM, "Eric A. Borisch" <ebori...@macports.org> wrote:
> On Wednesday, September 18, 2013, Ryan Schmidt wrote: > >> This is concerning, because it means the port builds differently depending >> on what ports the user already has installed. This won't work right if the >> user gets a pre-compiled package from the buildbot and is generally a bad >> idea. > > True, but the only people it will be any issue for are those that have > intentionally installed mpich-devel-default, and for those, rev-upgrade > will rebuild it locally (the libs are in different locations; no chance of > something subtle slipping by.) The two potential satisfying ports conflict > with each other, so only one can possibly be installed. > > These are people who have chosen to go off the beaten path intentionally. > > Your thoughts? I am not comfortable with this idea of depending on rev-upgrade to ensure correct port installation. Users might disable rev-upgrade for any number of reasons, and even if they haven't, there's no guarantee that they know what's going on when it runs and rebuilds a bunch of ports for no apparent reason. And it sets the bad precedent that it's okay for "port install foo +abc +def" to install different things on different systems. vq _______________________________________________ macports-dev mailing list macports-dev@lists.macosforge.org https://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo/macports-dev
