On Mar 25, 2018, at 01:49, Jan Stary wrote: > On Mar 24 14:14:37, Mojca wrote: >> On 24 March 2018 at 13:54, Jan Starý wrote: >>> The 'platforms' field of a Portfile is currently >>> both _required_ and _ignored_. By the Guide, >>> >>> A list of the platforms on which the port has been tested. >>> Required, but not interpreted in any way by the software >>> at this time; it is purely informational for users. >> >> I don't know anything about this, but it's possible that this could be >> interpreted already, or maybe soon in the future. > > Does anybody know if it is interpretd then? Guide says no.
As far as I know, the platforms variable is not currently used. >>> Also, it is allowed to say .e.g. "freebsd" but not e.g. "openbsd". >> >> Personally I don't see any reason for not allowing "openbsd" (other >> than the fact that only two ports will have that keyword, so it will >> probably be useless at the end). > > It _is_ completely useless now, whatever you put there. > >>> I propose that the 'platforms' field be no longer required >>> if it is ignored, and if it stays, let it be a free form text, >>> as opposed to a predefined definitive list of all unixes. >> >> We'll need it to specify which darwin versions are supported. > > That would totaly change the meaning, > requiring a change of that filed for each and every port. > In fact, making a lot of current content illegal. Obviously if we go forward with the plan of reusing the platforms variable as a way to signify which versions of OS are acceptable, it will be done in such a way that the values ports are currently using for that variable are not considered illegal. >> We currently have this ticket high on our priority list: >> https://trac.macports.org/ticket/15712 > > That's ten years old, and "there's no code written yet" > as of 13 days ago. We are aware. It is a feature we have wanted for a long time, and it was recently decided that we should perhaps finally try to do something about it.