/Library/Frameworks violates layout

[Juan Manuel Palacios]

On Nov 6, 2007, at 7:45 AM, Anders F Björklund wrote:

> Randall Wood wrote:
>
>>> 	So, do we have an agreement on this? Any objections to turning  
>>> on warnings against /Library/Frameworks in the upcoming MacPorts  
>>> 1.6? I support to move to discourage writing to that directory,  
>>> gcc's -F flag should allow any application needing a framework to  
>>> look for it under prefix, just as Anders makes it clean in his  
>>> message. Any reason why we *shouldn't* move our frameworks into  
>>> prefix?
>>
>> There are no reasons other than esthetics (I would prefer  
>> something like /Library/MacPorts/Frameworks, but like I said,  
>> thats merely an cosmetic concern). Go for it.
>
> The main question here is whether we should add the prefix  
> framework path to the default search, so that it is picked up  
> automatically by ports trying to use the frameworks (just like -I  
> and -L are adding the prefix search paths already)... ?


	I guess we can figure that out as we move forward with the change.  
If we see a bunch of -F flags leaking into our Portfiles maybe we can  
think of a set of suitable defaults in base that will spare us the -I  
& -L dance for frameworks.

>
> /Library/MacPorts/Frameworks has the worst of both worlds, it still  
> clutters /Library (outside of prefix) but is not in the default  
> framework search path either (so you still need to add something to  
> GCC / Xcode in order for them to find it properly)


	Other than adding gcc flags to base/Portfiles, what really would  
worry me is breaking anything by moving frameworks into our prefix.  
That being sorted out, I'd say there's good consensus to move them.

	Regards,...


-jmpp