Joshua Root wrote:
It would be better/easier to have everything under ${prefix},
instead of
installed into 4 possibly different locations (prefix, tclpackage,
applications, frameworks).
There's only a symlink in the Tcl package dir now (which needs to be
there so 'package require macports' w
Mark Farnell wrote:
- Rather than letting the user to choose any directory, the installer
can ask the user to choose whether it is for system or for user, if
system, ask password and install in /opt/local/, if user, install in
$(HOME)/opt/local
The major downside of a user install is that pref
On 2010-7-30 19:40 , Anders F Björklund wrote:
> It would be better/easier to have everything under ${prefix}, instead of
> installed into 4 possibly different locations (prefix, tclpackage,
> applications, frameworks).
There's only a symlink in the Tcl package dir now (which needs to be
there so
Jeremy Lavergne wrote:
I think MacPort is mainly for user programs and libraries. Admin
tools such as daemons and OS maintenance (such as stuff in /bin
and /sbin) should have already been in the OS X itself rather
than in
MacPort.
The packages in the `aqua` category are the only ones i
On 2010-7-30 08:25 , Mark Farnell wrote:
> So would it be a good idea to force *all* ports to be relocatable?
> (i.e. only hardcode path relative to base path, *not* absolute path)
Tell you what, you figure out a 100% reliable and automatic way to do
that, and we'll include it.
___
On Jul 29, 2010, at 4:42 PM, Ryan Schmidt wrote:
> I think it would be a Herculean effort to go through all 7200+ ports that we
> have to make sure they're relocatable. It would take years. I think I can
> speak for most of us when I say we're not going to do that. If you or someone
> wants to
On Jul 29, 2010, at 4:42 PM, Ryan Schmidt wrote:
> I think it would be a Herculean effort to go through all 7200+ ports that we
> have to make sure they're relocatable. It would take years. I think I can
> speak for most of us when I say we're not going to do that. If you or someone
> wants to
On Jul 29, 2010, at 17:25, Mark Farnell wrote:
> So would it be a good idea to force *all* ports to be relocatable?
> (i.e. only hardcode path relative to base path, *not* absolute path)
> Will this be difficult to be enforced by a lintian-like tool?
I think it would be a Herculean effort to go
> I think MacPort is mainly for user programs and libraries. Admin tools such
> as daemons and OS maintenance (such as stuff in /bin and /sbin) should have
> already been in the OS X itself rather than in
> MacPort.
The packages in the `aqua` category are the only ones in MacPorts that meet th
So would it be a good idea to force *all* ports to be relocatable?
(i.e. only hardcode path relative to base path, *not* absolute path)
Will this be difficult to be enforced by a lintian-like tool?
I think MacPort is mainly for user programs and libraries. Admin
tools such as daemons and OS maint
On 2010-07-29 11:57 , Mark Farnell wrote:
> Are there any way to make ports relocable?
>
> In OS X, applications are placed in Foo.app
I see a lot of applications in /usr/bin.
> whereas shared libraries (Framework) and data are placed under /Library
There are many libraries in /usr/lib and lots
> Are there any way to make ports relocable?
This would be an upstream matter. Some ports already are, e.g. if they
install only app or framework bundles.
- Josh
___
macports-dev mailing list
macports-dev@lists.macosforge.org
http://lists.macosforge.org
> The less immediate but possibly bigger issue is that archives are built
> for a particular prefix, and most of the software available in the ports
> tree is not relocatable. So when we start doing binary distribution,
> anyone not using a prefix of /opt/local misses out.
>
> - Josh
>
Are there a
On 2010-7-29 17:30 , Mark Farnell wrote:
> So I think the best way is to do away with the installer and put the
> entire macport (base, ports and configuration files) within
> MacPort.app.
>
> All the user needs to do is to include the bin path(s) within
> MacPort.app in .bashrc
>
> Then wheneve
On Jul 29, 2010, at 8:07 AM, Scott Webster wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 28, 2010 at 10:01 PM, Scott Haneda wrote:
>> Back to MacPorts. Simple install, defaults to /opt/local. Well thought
>> out, just like copy and paste was. /opt/local sets the foundation for
>> MacPorts moving forward. Advanced
So I think the best way is to do away with the installer and put the
entire macport (base, ports and configuration files) within
MacPort.app.
All the user needs to do is to include the bin path(s) within
MacPort.app in .bashrc
Then whenever we run "port install", port will detect the directory o
On Jul 28, 2010, at 10:07 PM, Scott Webster wrote:
> I guess Mark is presumably thinking of a situation where someone just
> doesn't have the permissions to install in /opt/local so it isn't just
> a willy-nilly desire to put it somewhere else, but still it seems that
> compiling from source is no
On Wed, Jul 28, 2010 at 10:01 PM, Scott Haneda wrote:
> Back to MacPorts. Simple install, defaults to /opt/local. Well thought out,
> just like copy and paste was. /opt/local sets the foundation for MacPorts
> moving forward. Advanced users who need something beyond a true "one click
> inst
On Jul 28, 2010, at 3:37 PM, Mark Farnell wrote:
> Yes, this is what I mean.
>
> However if you feel this can cause security issues, there are two
> alternative ways:
>
> - Rather than letting the user to choose any directory, the installer
> can ask the user to choose whether it is for system o
Yes, this is what I mean.
However if you feel this can cause security issues, there are two
alternative ways:
- Rather than letting the user to choose any directory, the installer
can ask the user to choose whether it is for system or for user, if
system, ask password and install in /opt/local/,
> If course I know one can install from source. What I am asking is to
> implement custom directory installation in the installer, as not everyone
> know how to compile sourcecode...
So you want the DMG installer to be able to go into a user directory when run
by a non-admin, and if po
If course I know one can install from source. What I am asking is to
implement custom directory installation in the installer, as not
everyone know how to compile sourcecode...
On Thu, Jul 29, 2010 at 10:22 AM, Daniel J. Luke wrote:
> On Jul 28, 2010, at 6:04 PM, Mark Farnell wrote:
>> I
On Jul 28, 2010, at 6:04 PM, Mark Farnell wrote:
> It is nice to see that everything is now contained in /opt/local/ and
> /usr/ is no longer touched.
I don't think the installer has ever installed into /usr
> However to allow macport to be installed by users without admin
> privilege within thei
It is nice to see that everything is now contained in /opt/local/ and
/usr/ is no longer touched.
However to allow macport to be installed by users without admin
privilege within their home directory, we should allow users to
specify custom install directory, and if the user has write access to
th
24 matches
Mail list logo
