On Apr 2, 2008, at 17:56, Rainer Müller wrote:
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 resulting in the massive rebuild fsck to bring everything back
to happyness when a dependency is upgraded.
I think it is a horrible idea. It totally defeats the feature of
having multiple versions of a port but only one active version.
If you start linking into the depot, also rewrite all calls to
binaries to the depot and all access to /opt/local/share and so on.
Otherwise it would totally become inconsistent. And I don't
understand why you want to look for such files inside the depot.
The depot stores multiple versions and you activate one and only
one of them - the others are inactive and not used at all.
- If I deactivate a port, I *expect* depending ports to break.
Of course a port will no longer work if a dependency is not active.
- If I upgrade a port, of course I might also have to rebuild
depending
ports, because the installed library changed.
- If I uninstall an inactive port, I expect it to be *safe* because it
is not used.
Please tell me what advantage you want to achieve with this?
I believe we are trying to find a way to allow multiple versions of a
single port to be active and in use at the same time.
So far I haven't formed an opinion on whether we should do this, or
whether the method described above is the best way to do it.
_______________________________________________
macports-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo/macports-dev
