In article <[email protected]>,
 Rainer Muller <[email protected]> wrote:
> Well, after thinking about this again, we could also do it the other way
> around. The majority of ports already builds just fine if you have the
> Command Line Tools only, without Xcode (ignore warnings from base about
> missing xcodebuild, it's not actually required in this case).
> 
> That would allow to save the additional installation of Xcode.app and
> only require `xcode-select --install`. However, with only ~2.5 GiB, the
> reduced disk usage without Xcode.app is quite small compared to the
> increasing drive capacities.
> 
> For this variant we would first need to track which parts of Xcode and
> which SDKs are actually required for each port. This information could
> however also be relevant for sandboxing/trace mode. Maybe we could add
> some new depspec to base to mark ports that require the full Xcode
> installation, something like:   depends_build tool:xcode

>From the outside looking in, that strikes me as a much more realistic and 
potentially achievable goal.  Whether it is worth the effort or not is, of 
course, up to all of you.  It would be nice to not have to require the install 
of Xcode.app.  This was reinforced just last evening at a technical meetup 
where I was helping someone get Macports installed on Mavericks and, while the 
CLT installation went very fast, it was taking forever to download the full 
Xcode 5.  And chances are that the CLT package was sufficient for the ports in 
question.

-- 
 Ned Deily,
 [email protected]

_______________________________________________
macports-dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo/macports-dev

Reply via email to