On Thu, Nov 23, 2017 at 12:51:56AM -0800, Yuri wrote: > On 11/22/17 08:59, Brooks Davis wrote: > > Looking to the future, is the port an obviously candidate for FLAVORS or > > multi-packages? If so, they you probably want to keep the current > > plist. If not, then I guess it depends on your confidence that the port > > will remain well behaved. > > > Flavors and multi-packages will work fine with autoplist. autoplist > always generates the plist according to the currently selected options.
Flavors maybe, multi-packages, definitely not. With multi-packages each component needs to be tagged in the plist with the package it will be part of. You can do that programatically, but autoplist can't do it generically (except perhaps in the most trivial, path based cases). -- Brooks
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature