On Fri, Sep 07, 2012 at 06:28:12PM -0400, Stuart Cassoff wrote: > Now that you're in there, why not bring swig up to the latest? > > I posted a diff for a swig-wip a while back and looking at it now, > it doesn't seem too hard to upgrade. I do remember being confused > about boost and that maybe swig will find and use things if installed, > even if --without-things is used.
I guessed that exists a good reason for the outdated port, so I only added the line with the option. I've been reading the changes of the last four years and working in the update this afternoon. The update isn't so easy, 68 packages depends of swig and I've seen at least 4 patches related to swig. Also I'm explicitely disabling the most of the languages (except the enabled in 1.3.6). I don't like the magic of "configure" for this package. If someone wants enable some language, he or she needs add the necessary stuff to the Makefile (modules, *_depends, etc). I may be wrong, but I think that dpb will generate different packages with each bulk build if we rely on the magic of "configure", eg: if dpb is compiling swig and packageY (that depends of languageZ) at the same time, swig will enable the support for languageZ because the package is installed in the build machine. I can't do a bulk build for to test the packages that depends of swig, but I'll review the makefiles for to see the languages necessary. I'll send you the patch the next week :) -- Juan Francisco Cantero Hurtado http://juanfra.info
