On Monday December 28 2015 00:11:28 Clemens Lang wrote:
> and fix your directory naming first. If the Portfile provides kf5-kate, > it should be in a kf5-kate directory. I'd just as well avoid having redundant information in the paths; kf5-kate is already in the kf5 category/tree, so its portdir doesn't need to have that additional tag. Also saves typing. > Two ports with the same name in a single port tree are unsupported. > Don't do that. But I don't ... the ports are called kate and kf5-kate. > When portindex reindexes a port, it will also reindex all its subports. > There is no easy way to determine whether a change in the Portfile did > affect a subport or not, but I agree that the detection of whether a Of course, I only reflected on the fact that adding subports to a Portfile causes it to be reindexed every time. That's beginning to increase the indexing time of my portree noticeably; I have a few Portfiles with a rather large number of subports (the KF5 Frameworks metaport, but also the port with all of Calligra's translations). > is an entry for it in the PortIndex.quick file. Note that there is no > way to figure out which port a Portfile is going to provide without > fully running it (which comes with the full runtime overhead and is thus Is that actually needed if you determined the port name(s) it provided once and associate those with a sufficiently strong hash? I'd say it isn't; as long as mtime and hash are unchanged the name shouldn't have changed either. If you agree with this that might actually make looking at improving the index a bit more appealing to me :) R _______________________________________________ macports-dev mailing list [email protected] https://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo/macports-dev
