Re: Depot dependencies [was Re: Ticket #14796 (pike): please commit]

Citando Jordan K. Hubbard : > [ Making another futile attempt to use a more descriptive subject line ] > > On Apr 2, 2008, at 3:56 PM, Rainer Müller wrote: > >> I think it is a horrible idea. It totally defeats the feature of >> having multiple versions of a port but only one active version. > >

Re: Ticket #14796 (pike): please commit

On Apr 2, 2008, at 6:58 PM, James Berry wrote: Passing the -L -I PKG_CONFIG_PATH etc flags to link to the stuff in the depot will have absolutely no effect on the resulting binary, making such a change, imo, pointless, older versions of things will still be broken when you update some dependenc

Re: Ticket #14796 (pike): please commit

Jordan K. Hubbard wrote: > I think we must be talking about a different mechanism since in what I'm > suggesting, the embedded paths WOULD point to the appropriate depot > locations, the install_name of the libs WOULD be the target locations > and applications absolutely WOULD look for their resour

Depot dependencies [was Re: Ticket #14796 (pike): please commit]

[ Making another futile attempt to use a more descriptive subject line ] On Apr 2, 2008, at 3:56 PM, Rainer Müller wrote: I think it is a horrible idea. It totally defeats the feature of having multiple versions of a port but only one active version. Not at all. If you want to continue the

Re: Ticket #14796 (pike): please commit

I think we must be talking about a different mechanism since in what I'm suggesting, the embedded paths WOULD point to the appropriate depot locations, the install_name of the libs WOULD be the target locations and applications absolutely WOULD look for their resources in the depot location

Re: Ticket #14796 (pike): please commit

On Apr 2, 2008, at 3:44 PM, Peter O'Gorman wrote: Eric Hall wrote: On Tue, Apr 01, 2008 at 02:02:57AM -0700, Jordan K. Hubbard wrote: On Apr 1, 2008, at 1:27 AM, Florian Ebeling wrote: This is sadly somewhat controversial. I think dependencies should definitely be directed at the depot lo

Re: Ticket #14796 (pike): please commit

Eric Hall wrote: I've always thought this was an excellent idea, it neatly solves conflicting version problems (libnet for example) and allows a new version of $THIS_DEPENDENCY to be installed without breaking $OTHER_SOFTWARE that's linked against $OLDER_VERSION_OF_THIS_DEPENDENCY, and/or

Re: Ticket #14796 (pike): please commit

Eric Hall wrote: > On Tue, Apr 01, 2008 at 02:02:57AM -0700, Jordan K. Hubbard wrote: >> On Apr 1, 2008, at 1:27 AM, Florian Ebeling wrote: >> This is sadly somewhat controversial. I think dependencies should >> definitely be directed at the depot location, e.g. something that >> links with,

[MacPorts] #14901: firefox-x11 does not provide file-selection browsers (fwd)

I am forwarding this ticket because firefox-x11 has no maintainer, and because I wonder whether anyone has installed firefox-x11 and has it working without the error I report. I searched for tickets on this and found none. #14901: firefox-x11 does not provide file-selection browsers -

Dependencies [was Re: Ticket #14796 (pike): please commit]

[OK, time to change the bloody subject line finally! :-) ] On Apr 2, 2008, at 9:50 AM, Eric Hall wrote: Is it really that hard? Its non-trivial, that's clear, but is it something larger than a GSoC person could tackle? Or should an item like this be added to the design scope of a n

Please review: fastest mirror selection proposal (with patch)

Ticket: Cheers, Josh ___ macports-dev mailing list macports-dev@lists.macosforge.org http://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo/macports-dev

Re: Ticket #14796 (pike): please commit

On Tue, Apr 01, 2008 at 02:02:57AM -0700, Jordan K. Hubbard wrote: > > On Apr 1, 2008, at 1:27 AM, Florian Ebeling wrote: > > >Maybe I'm too ignorant, but isn't also the fact that dependencies > >are version-agnostic one major cause of build fails and probably a > >cost-effective gain to chan

Re: variants / sub-packages

On Apr 1, 2008, at 03:40, Robert Hinn wrote: I was wondering: seeing some ports called *-devel in the list, does MacPorts offer a sub-package mechanism? I haven't found anything in the guide, so I considered using variants as a proper way to handle optional features in a software which I w

Re: Ticket #14796 (pike): please commit

On Apr 1, 2008, at 07:32, Guido Soranzio wrote: I installed jhbuild and graphwiz since I preferred to run "jhbuild dot | dot -Tpng > dependencies.png" instead of continuing making by hand . Maybe you'll be interested in my port-visu

Re: Ticket #14796 (pike): please commit

On Apr 1, 2008, at 04:45, Robert Hinn wrote: Hm, do you suggest using and linking only to ports? I find the lib:* dependency quite useful as I'm using the official .dmg package of MySQL from the MySQL homepage instead of the mac port (mainly because I've already been using it before instal

Re: Ticket #14796 (pike): please commit

On Apr 2, 2008, at 03:05, Anders F Björklund wrote: Apache installs into either /opt/local or /opt/local/apache2, so that you can run both Apache 1.3 and Apache 2.2 at once. If that was the goal of the /opt/local/apache2 prefix, it has failed, because you cannot activate both apache and ap

Re: Ticket #14796 (pike): please commit

Jordan K. Hubbard wrote: I'm not going so far as to suggest that dependencies should be limited to items in the Depot, and I definitely see the value of being able to link with components of the OS which would be painful to duplicate (all of X11 comes to mind) or have been specifically op