[28060] trunk/dports/archivers/sharutils/Portfile

[N_Ox]

Le 20 août 07 à 03:08, Ryan Schmidt a écrit :

> On Aug 19, 2007, at 17:06, N_Ox wrote:
>
>> Le 19 août 07 à 22:42, Ryan Schmidt a écrit :
>>
>>> On Aug 19, 2007, at 11:31, source_changes at macosforge.org wrote:
>>>
>>>> Revision: 28060
>>>>           http://trac.macosforge.org/projects/macports/changeset/ 
>>>> 28060
>>>> Author:   nox at macports.org
>>>> Date:     2007-08-19 09:31:54 -0700 (Sun, 19 Aug 2007)
>>>>
>>>> Log Message:
>>>> -----------
>>>> sharutils:
>>>>  * Updated to 4.7.
>>>>  * NLS support is now a variant.
>>>
>>> Why, by the way? Do you believe most people will not want native  
>>> language support? There's a lot of software with NLS, and I think  
>>> most of it is on by default. Do you propose going through all of  
>>> them to make NLS off by default? Why is this desirable? Why  
>>> should we spend time on this? All it does, in the end, is give  
>>> the user yet another choice they need to make. Our goal should  
>>> not be to give the user every conceivable choice, but to use our  
>>> expertise to choose a reasonable configuration for the user.
>>
>> I think NLS should be a variant in every port, then it could be  
>> able to enable it if you want.
>> This would be a reasonable configuration setting for the user.
>
> But again, why? It sounds like you're proposing quite a lot of  
> effort for something that will in the end be nothing but an  
> inconvenience.
>
> My rough estimate is that over 500 ports depend on gettext at this  
> time. You're proposing that all those portfiles be modified to  
> include a new variant for gettext support, and having it off by  
> default. All those ports will need to be tested to ensure the port  
> works correctly with and without that variant. Since the installed  
> product will be different, the revision of each port will have to  
> be incremented. Anyone who has those ports installed will therefore  
> be made to rebuild them, costing everyone time. And the end result  
> of all this effort is that gettext support is removed from those  
> ports. For those who do not use NLS, nothing will change -- no  
> benefit, no detriment. For those who do use NLS, only detriment  
> will occur -- they will lose NLS and will have to uninstall the  
> ports and reinstall them with the +nls variant to get it back. I  
> don't see why this is desirable.
>
>

There's 189 ports depending on gettext, roughly 20 of them depends on  
it through a variant, there's not _that_ much work to made NLS a  
variant.
IMHO, your so-called reasonable configuration for the user should be  
a wise-thought variants.conf, with comments about the global variants  
user should be interested in.

About testing the port, don't tell me NLS is a cricital feature that  
requires a lot of expensive tests, we all know this is just a matter  
of a configure flag, 2 links against libiconv and libintl and a bunch  
of installed locale files.

--
Anthony Ramine, the infamous MacPorts Trac slave.
nox at macports.org