Ryan Schmidt wrote:
Stupid, stupid, stupid Reply rules on this list...
The list configuration is not stupid, for the reasons outlined here:
http://www.unicom.com/pw/reply-to-harmful.html
As long as you can live with a few responses not making it to the list,
due to me hitting the wrong key/button then everything is fine with me.
:-)
ding that to the configure.pre_args would probably break all the ports
whose configure scripts don't recognize the --mandir argument,
wouldn't it? I hate MacPorts base changes that break whole swathes of
ports. I feel that people should feel free to make such changes to
base, so long as they also modify all affected ports so they do not
break as a result. If that is too cumbersome, then IMHO the change to
base should not be made. For example, making mtree violations fatal
errors broke lots of ports. That should not have been done.
Most likely it would break ports not using regular autoconf configure,
yes.
It mostly works for the %configure macro in RPM, but certainly not
everywhere.
Some ports that install into ${prefix}/man either use their own
build system or plain have it hardcoded in their Makefiles. For
example, MacPorts have hardcoded the location of ${prefix}/share/man
in doc/Makefile, no matter what ${mandir} is ? The main reason why
it didn't used to be such a big fuzz, was because of the
${prefix}/man -> share/man symlink.
And why is it now a big deal to track these mtree violations? I still
have said symlink.
I don't know either, earlier changes were delayed due to
DarwinPorts->MacPorts,
and now they are being delayed due to man->share/man. Both petty, in my
book :-P
--anders
_______________________________________________
macports-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo/macports-dev
