On 2016-03-31 22:36, René J. V. Bertin wrote: > So in the end I copy my PortGroup files into the rsync-based default port > tree, > and I don't run selfupdate anymore (I cherry-pick upgrades from the svn port > tree instead). I have no idea how long I'll be able to keep that up ...
Just use a subversion checkout, replace the file and leave it in modified, uncommitted state. You will still get all other changes with 'svn up'. > Rainer Müller wrote: >> The lookup strategy is also the same for mirror/archive sites, > > How many ports need to change those? For ports in external trees? All of them need to define their own mirrors or archive sites. >> variant descriptions, livecheck > > Those are mostly defined in ports, I'd say, or in some cases in PortGroups. I am talking about _resources/port1.0/variant_descriptions.conf _resources/port1.0/livecheck/ Please just look into the files before making assumptions. >> . I am not sure whether it would make sense to >> change this for all of them (for example archive sites are definitely >> only local to a ports tree) or to introduce a special lookup just for >> port groups... > > Can you give examples? I'm having trouble imagining why there would be any > need > to change the lookup strategy for those. I see this as inconsistency if port groups were looked up differently than the rest of _resources. Apparently not even the current lookup order is documented clear enough, so I would not want to introduce more complexity. Rainer _______________________________________________ macports-dev mailing list macports-dev@lists.macosforge.org https://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo/macports-dev
