On 2009-05-30 17:12, Thomas De Contes wrote: [...]
> ... i don't understand why you prefer (1) for MacPorts itself > > since Ryan Schmidt uses (2) for ports, i don't see what kind of > avantage you get using (1) for MacPorts itself It allows to build base with another compiler and it makes it more portable. > i fully understand Ryan's choice, and finally I agree with him > what aren't you agreement in what he said with ? As I explained in my previous mail ... > and anyway, i find that it's better to have MacPorts homogeneous, > between itself and its ports, don't you think ? ... I still see no reason to restrict building MacPorts itself to a specific compiler. Users building MacPorts from source are expected to know what they are doing. Having MacPorts installation with a different prefix in PATH during configure might fail anyway if certain ports are installed (e.g. tcl). Therefore, use a clean environment with the system's default PATH if you don't want to use MacPorts for that. Rainer _______________________________________________ macports-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/macports-users
