On Friday May 22 2015 22:14:09 Mihai Moldovan wrote: > > Never. The "features" are experimental and the standardization committees are > not in favor of even adding them.
Those are the current additional features in libjpeg9; they say nothing of libjpeg10+ ... > We do not have a concept of virtual packages. You are trying to be too smart > and > it will eventually painfully go wrong. For proper support of virtual packages, > base needs to be extended. Variants are NOT the way to go here. Dependencies > on > variants are NOT supported, not counting the kludge that is enforce_variants. I think you're either over or under-estimating my smartness. I'm not proposing anything like a variant or a virtual package, simply a package that installs into its own prefix. (Yes, my draft proposal has a transitional variant, but if you looked at it you looked at it you'll have seen that it's supposed to be just that, transitional.) R _______________________________________________ macports-users mailing list [email protected] https://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo/macports-users
