On Nov 6, 2007, at 7:45 AM, Anders F Björklund wrote:
Randall Wood wrote:
So, do we have an agreement on this? Any objections to turning
on warnings against /Library/Frameworks in the upcoming MacPorts
1.6? I support to move to discourage writing to that directory,
gcc's -F flag should allow any application needing a framework to
look for it under prefix, just as Anders makes it clean in his
message. Any reason why we *shouldn't* move our frameworks into
prefix?
There are no reasons other than esthetics (I would prefer
something like /Library/MacPorts/Frameworks, but like I said,
thats merely an cosmetic concern). Go for it.
The main question here is whether we should add the prefix
framework path to the default search, so that it is picked up
automatically by ports trying to use the frameworks (just like -I
and -L are adding the prefix search paths already)... ?
I guess we can figure that out as we move forward with the change.
If we see a bunch of -F flags leaking into our Portfiles maybe we can
think of a set of suitable defaults in base that will spare us the -I
& -L dance for frameworks.
/Library/MacPorts/Frameworks has the worst of both worlds, it still
clutters /Library (outside of prefix) but is not in the default
framework search path either (so you still need to add something to
GCC / Xcode in order for them to find it properly)
Other than adding gcc flags to base/Portfiles, what really would
worry me is breaking anything by moving frameworks into our prefix.
That being sorted out, I'd say there's good consensus to move them.
Regards,...
-jmpp
_______________________________________________
macports-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo/macports-dev
