Le 07-03-08 à 21:31, Randall Wood a écrit :
On 8 Mar 2007, at 13:05, Daniel J. Luke wrote:
On Mar 8, 2007, at 10:30 AM, Yves de Champlain wrote:
Are there people out there who really use the image installations ?
I mean, who are activating / deactivating ports on a regular basis,
in such a way that it would not make sense to install / uninstall
them from a tarball instead ?
I've thought for a while that improving archive mode a little and
deprecating image mode would be a good idea (it's why I patched
upgrade to work with direct+archive mode when it only worked with
image mode before).
The one thing we would loose is the potential for ports to depend
on a specific version of another port that was installed but not
'active' (ie, you could have multiple versions of some library
port installed with ports that needed each version linked against
the one they wanted without having to change the normal install
layout of that library). I _think_ this is something that jkh has
wanted ever since images were first implemented.
It seems to me like this just exponentially increases the
installed system complexities and in the few cases where it would
be very useful to have multiple different library versions
installed, it makes more sense to me to alter the port so they can
both be installed at the same time (like the db43/db44 ports, for
example).
I think direct + archive mode makes more intuitive sense as well
(and gives us an obvious path to distributing binaries, as we
would eventually just distribute appropriate archives somehow).
And if I use the direct install mode, what happens to the "post-
activate" phase ?
I don't think it gets run. (but it has been a while since I looked).
[g5:~/Projects/macports/dports] dluke% grep -r 'post-activate' . |
wc -l
144
... which isn't too many to look at and change to post-destroot/
post-install if we ever decide to depricate images.
A healthy chunk of those are so written because they broke if the
port-activate process was run during the destroot or post-install
phase. See the long history of problems with scrollkeeper for an
example.
Does post-install make any sense at all in image mode ? Are there
really issues that must be dealt with after destroot and before
activation ? Most of the post-install procedures are ui_msg stuff.
So could MacPorts have only one finalize procedure that is run after
install in direct mode and postponed after activation in image mode
to replace both post-install and post-activate ?
yves_______________________________________________
macports-users mailing list
macports-users@lists.macosforge.org
http://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo/macports-users
