On Wed, Aug 28, 2013 at 4:54 PM, Jeremy Huddleston Sequoia <jerem...@macports.org> wrote: > > On Aug 28, 2013, at 12:30, Michael Dickens <michae...@macports.org> wrote: > >> Your "recipe" was pretty concise (unlike >> others which declare each variant explicitly and separately), and it >> does what -you- as the port maintainer want it to do. > > Actually, it didn't. I used the old mpich Portfile as an example of broken > variant conflicts in my email yesterday.
I had noticed the lint behavior, and had added (but not yet committed) separate sections to try to handle/report the conflicts; if the new way fixes it the right way, then huzzah! I was trying to figure out why port variants was reporting things correctly; and your explanation (in the other thread; interpreted as one string) clears that up. Thanks, Eric _______________________________________________ macports-dev mailing list macports-dev@lists.macosforge.org https://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo/macports-dev
