On Apr 14, 2009, at 15:30, C. Florian Ebeling wrote:
That's the reason for the suggestion to add a new dependency type
"gem" or
"rubygem", which behaves much like "path" or "lib" dependencies.
Not controlling
installation, but checking.
I don't quite understand how this suggestion would work, and on
principle I think I'm not in favor of adding a new dependency type
which is specific to a particular type of software. All existing
dependency types are generic and applicable to all types of software,
which is IMHO as it should be. If you want to depend on a gem, there
should be a port for that gem, and you declare a dependency on the
port as you would for any other type of software. There could,
though, be shortcuts that would make such portfiles smaller. I think
that would fall under the umbrella of a portgroup, like the perl5
portgroup for simplifying Perl CPAN modules or the upcoming pecl
portgroup for PHP PECL modules.
http://trac.macports.org/ticket/18839
_______________________________________________
macports-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/macports-dev
