On Nov 10, 2008, at 17:21, Ryan Schmidt wrote:
On Nov 10, 2008, at 04:59, Ryan Schmidt wrote:
On Nov 10, 2008, at 04:28, Emmanuel Hainry wrote:
Isn't it possible to update render to a pseudo newer version that
has no
file
Yes, I just did that. Unfortunately I had not completed all my
modifications by the time the portindex was regenerated, so I
wanted to notify users of the issue.
but depends on xorg-renderproto? Or else to have some kind of
"superseding" mechanism?
Making render depend on xorg-renderproto will not work: the
dependency xorg-renderproto would be built first before render
would be updated to the no-files version. You would be guaranteed
to get exactly the conflict message we're trying to avoid.
Making xorg-renderproto depend on render might work. I could
change the render port again to not issue the message I added,
advising users to uninstall it, but instead let it sit around
empty for awhile until everyone has upgraded. Then later I can
increase the revision and re-add that message. I don't know if
this is better than what I did; it's all a bit messy. If someone
feels strongly about this they can change things. For now, I'm
going to bed. :)
I just did this (making xorg-renderproto depend on render) since
the upgrade was not going smoothly without this.
This seems to be working. The correct procedure now is simply to
"port upgrade" your outdated ports. The render port will stick around
for now (containing no files except a readme). Some time later render
will be removed.
_______________________________________________
macports-users mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/macports-users
