On 7 Nov 2012, at 14:06, Jeremy Lavergne <jer...@lavergne.gotdns.org> wrote:
>> Which packages if I can ask? because they might be packages that I do not >> want nor need. > > I grepped to find 148 packages using our xcode includes explicitly > (xcode.*1\.0). There may be more that were manually built without using our > PortGroup files. Unless these packages are essential to using macports, and thus unavoidable, 148 packages are a trivial percentage of the packages provided by macports. Couldn't I just avoid them altogether? > >> How so? I would have imagined it's the CLT that make the difference, after >> all they mast be installed for macports. > > ...and Xcode must also be installed. > > We do version detection using `xcodebuild -version` (see zlib for an > example). We would need an alternative to this if it's not installed. That's fine, and as I said I accept the space penalty of having to have Xcode, but I fail to see why the versioning could not be done on clang or llvm (or whatever thing is in the CLT package that could be used for this) BW F > -- Federico Calboli f.calb...@gmail.com _______________________________________________ macports-users mailing list macports-users@lists.macosforge.org http://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo/macports-users
