On Jan 14, 2009, at 21:27, Ryan Schmidt wrote:
The script ends with the message "This tool does not update libtool
archives, so your .la files might be incorrect." How would the user
know which .la files are affected, and how to fix them?
"rm -f /opt/local/lib/*.la" is my recommendation... short of that
'grep '/usr/X11' /opt/local/lib/*.la
but I'm a bit more anal than that... I'd port uninstall then port
install them ;)
How would I identify which ports those are that I should uninstall
and reinstall?
'otool -L' and 'grep /usr/X11' should do it... same as the
install_name_tool does...
It just seems to me that any Tiger user with any X-using ports
would run into this issue. How are users supposed to be handling
this issue?
by doing just as I mentioned above or by waiting until the
dependencies are changed to port:XXXX instead of lib:XXXX and it
should "just work"...
We certainly a Problem Hotlist entry about this then, telling users
how to do this.
It sounds like our ports tree is just broken for existing Tiger
users without significant manual intervention by the user, which is
not a good state for the tree to be in. If the fix is to change the
dependencies from lib:X:X back to port:X again
They're not going back to port:X. They're going to port:X. They
haven't been at port:X before.
As is, there shouldn't be any port: dependencies for the X11 libraries
except from other X11 libraries.
, what is the plan for doing that? Can it be done now or are there
remaining outstanding issues?
As mentioned, it needs to be done all at once and affected ports need
to be revision bumped (is there a tool to automatically revision bump
a file? If not, manually setting the revision will probably be the
bottleneck).
The only issue with it that I'm aware of is with ice-cpp conflicting
with xorg-libice on case-insensitive file systems.
_______________________________________________
macports-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/macports-dev
