/Library/Frameworks violates layout

[Juan Manuel Palacios]

On Nov 6, 2007, at 11:01 AM, N_Ox wrote:

>
> Le 6 nov. 07 à 07:05, Juan Manuel Palacios a écrit :
>
>>
>> 	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?
>>
>> 	And as for macports1.0, we can still rely on configure's --with- 
>> tclpackage flag to place it inside prefix in customized  
>> installations.
>>
>> 	Regards,...
>>
>>
>> -jmpp
>>
>> <snip>
>
> Does --with-tclpackage add some tcl code to the beginning of the  
> port executable to add the path to ${auto_path}?


	Code is added to the port executable, yes, but only in the form of:

----------
(from trunk/base/src/port/Makefile)
----------
edit = sed \
         -e 's, at TCLSH\@,$(TCLSH),g' \
         -e 's, at TCL_PACKAGE_DIR\@,$(TCL_PACKAGE_DIR),g'
----------
($(TCL_PACKAGE_DIR) being received from autoconf through --with- 
tclpackage)
----------

	So that:

----------
(from trunk/base/src/port/port.tcl)
catch {source \
     [file join "@TCL_PACKAGE_DIR@" macports1.0 macports_fastload.tcl]}
package require macports


	The result is that the port executable is able to load the  
macports1.0 package, wherever it's put by autoconf (/Library/Tcl  
being the default). But I don't know about ${auto_path}, I don't  
think anything about the tcl package is added to it; why are you  
interested in that?


-jmpp