On Jun 22, 2012, at 1:06 AM, Ryan Schmidt wrote: >> Are they causing a problem for us? > > I was dealing with a port that installed an unmodified .packlist. Unmodified > .packlists contain the path to the destroot, so they're not useful. Since > nobody had submitted a bug report about that I was guessing that maybe we > don't need .packlists at all. If not, we could delete them. Alternately, if > we should keep them, then we must fix them so that they don't contain the > destroot path. The perl5 portgroup already does this, but there are other > ports that make perl modules and .packlists that have not copied that block > of code.
Yeah, they have to be dealt with in one way or another. We could probably do like debian (and probably other packagers do) and remove them before installing - or we could continue to do what we do and 'fix them' so that they're installed and correct. Either way, the perl5 portgroup takes care of it for most modules, and anything that doesn't use it will have to take care of it itself (probably by copying code from the perl5 portgroup). -- Daniel J. Luke +========================================================+ | *---------------- [email protected] ----------------* | | *-------------- http://www.geeklair.net -------------* | +========================================================+ | Opinions expressed are mine and do not necessarily | | reflect the opinions of my employer. | +========================================================+ _______________________________________________ macports-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/macports-dev
