On 2017-1-12 18:58 , Aaron Madlon-Kay wrote:
Hi all. I was hoping to get some advice:
I want to make the sqlite3-tools package available via MacPorts
(binaries available at https://sqlite.org/download.html); this package
contains three binaries: sqlite3 CLI shell, sqldiff, and sqlite3_analyzer.
Is "sqlite3 CLI shell" the 'sqlite3' binary that is already installed by
the sqlite3 port?
Problem:
sqlite3_analyzer requires TCL; it turns out the `tcl` port actually
includes sqlite3_analyzer built from its own bundled copy of sqlite3,
but it is an older version. This older version is installed to
${prefix}/bin, so it conflicts with any newer version we might try to
install.
Questions:
- Is it common knowledge that sqlite3_analyzer is available as part of
TCL? Its inclusion there seems coincidental, perhaps just due to the
fact that it's implemented in TCL?
- If no, can we remove it from the `tcl` port?
It's well known that Tcl 8.6 bundles all of sqlite3. Probably fine to
remove or rename this script though.
- If sqlite3_analyzer can't be removed from the `tcl` port, should the
newer binary have a different name or be put in a different path? Is
there a standard scheme for disambiguation like this?
There's no standard scheme. The usual approach is to append the name of
the port to one of the files.
- If no to all above, sqlite3_analyzer can be built against the
system-provided TCL framework, and the port can be marked as
incompatible with the `tcl` port. Is that acceptable? (I would think not)
You think right. :)
Aside:
I've got this working in two forms: a +tools variant on the `sqlite3`
port, and a new port called `sqlite3-tools`; I'm feeling like a the
+tools variant might be the better way to go, but feedback on this would
be appreciated as well.
I would think a separate port (or subport) would be better. A
non-default variant would not be available as an archive, and I don't
like the idea of adding a Tcl dependency to sqlite3 by default.
- Josh
