On Oct 19, 2010, at 10:24, David Evans wrote: > On 10/19/10 8:14 AM, Ryan Schmidt wrote: >> Why don't we delete that variant and make the xpdf port always do that? >> > > I agree but there is a political history behind this. > > Xpdf was first and poppler is an off-shoot of the original xpdf code written > as a library to allow other projects to use it. > > The two have diverged some-what and it has only been relatively recently > that > xpdf was modified to allow linking to poppler rather than use its own code. > > Xpdf web site still doesn't mention poppler although it is the variant > that is > currently being maintained (xpdf hasn't had a change in a year and then only > minor). > > But the solution that you propose would be the one that works. > > Perhaps just making the +with_poppler variant a default variant would > fix the > problem and allow xpdf purists to use xpdf without poppler (if they > really never > want to use poppler).
If the variant is kept, I would want it renamed to just "+poppler" (we do not name variants with "with_" or "without_" prefixes in MacPorts). Also if the variant is kept my addition of the conflicts keywords needs to be fixed to only apply the conflict if it's actually relevant. _______________________________________________ macports-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/macports-users
