On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 4:34 PM, Bradley Giesbrecht wrote:
>
> On Aug 22, 2012, at 7:20 AM, Michael Dickens wrote:
>
>> Hmm … does (I think it's called) rev-update do its thing after installing
>> from archive? It's the post-install "Updating database of binaries" and
>> "Scanning binaries for linking errors" check. If it does, then it should
>> catch the linking error between qt4-mac +framework and gnuplot, though I'm
>> not sure what it can do if an older version of gnuplot was installed from
>> archive that is not compatible with the current qt4-mac install. The
>> archival capabilities can only go so far in terms of variants.
>>
>> I have thought about qt4-mac's dual library / framework build, since it
>> causes these sorts of issues. I'm wondering if trying to install qt4-mac as
>> dual framework / library would work: install as framework internally (to the
>> Qt build), and then link from the frameworks into ${prefix}/include/Qt* and
>> ${prefix}/lib/libQt*. The former is already done, and seems to work well.
>> Doing the latter is a relatively simple extension of the former. If both
>> libraries and frameworks were installed, always, then dependent ports could
>> choose which one to link to and would, after the change, always be backwards
>> compatible with older versions. Yes, this might make sense to look into.
>>
>> Thoughts on the above? - MLD
That means removing the +framework option altogether and making
frameworks by default? To me, having a nicely structured frameworks +
symlinks to enable "old-fashioned" ;) applications to work properly
sounds reasonable. (Then you can also patch pc files :)
> Would frameworks work as a subport;
They could, but ...
> letting qt4-mac dependent ports pick what they want to depend on?
... my guess is that any given port doesn't care at all whether it
depends on qt4-mac, qt4-mac-devel, qt4-mac +framework or qt4-mac-devel
+framework, subports or not. The only important part is that it has to
use the same version/variant out of the four I mentioned as the one it
was compiled for. At the moment the Portfile looks like
variant qt description "Enable qt terminal" {
depends_lib-append port:qt4-mac
configure.args-append --enable-qt
}
How should it look if I wanted to support either of the four
options/subports mentioned above? I guess it complicates matters. For
hardly any gain. Ports that have to depend on a different python
version might have a reason to do so (incompatible with a certain
python version). For Qt, + or - framework is just cosmetics.
Mojca
_______________________________________________
macports-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo/macports-dev
