If a given CPAN module doesn't work then we could create a real Portfile
for it versus interfacing with CPAN. By default, I would assume, the
majority of modules should work. Tongue-in-cheek, I'd additionally say
tickets would be made for modules that don't "just work".
I'm not sure we should be in the business of making sure every single CPAN
module can work. Aren't there more CPAN modules than MacPorts packages
(127 205 modules versus 17 823 ports). And now notice how many perls we
provide.
Otherwise, we continue to lack a user's desired modules and they will just
install through CPAN and collide with MacPorts.
On Mon, 11 Nov 2013 06:06:13 -0500, Ryan Schmidt <[email protected]>
wrote:
If we don’t have a portfile for each CPAN module, how would we:
* not update to a newer available version if that version did not build
on OS X?
* apply patches?
* blacklist a compiler?
* add a flag to CFLAGS?
* check the license to check if a dependent is distributable?
It seems like each of these would require special workarounds, which are
not needed with the current way of creating a portfile for each package.
_______________________________________________
macports-users mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo/macports-users
