On Tuesday July 07 2015 23:29:53 Marko Käning wrote: Hi Marko,
> ah, ok, so it would be up to you to create this specific file for the qt5-kde > port… That would probably be the safer route, yes. > > Anyway, yes, this could benefit from some discussion, because evidently one > > would have to > > duplicate at least the path: style dependency declarations in both the 2 > > actual payload > > PortGroups, or else move it into the generic/omnipotent PortGroup … > > > Yes, this needs careful discussing, as quite a few projects will be hit by > this in the future. The principle is easy enough and is illustrated in my qt4 (and probably also the qt5) PortGroup which were written to work with both the exclusive and the concurrent Qt installation layouts. So getting it right shouldn't be too hard in itself; I'm more concerned with longer term maintenance. It might be good enough though if only the qt5-kde PortGroup has support for the different path: style dependencies that required to depend on either qt5-mac or qt5-kde. R _______________________________________________ macports-dev mailing list [email protected] https://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo/macports-dev
