runtime vs build dependencies in making metapackages?

[Allen McBride]

Thanks!  So what I need to do is:

1) uninstall all the ports I installed with the default settings  
(portautoclean yes and portarchivemode no)
2) set "portautoclean no" in ${prefix}/etc/macports/macports.conf
3) also set "portarchivemode yes" in the the same file
4) run "port mdmg solfege" (no need to do port -f destroot anymore  
because of the last two steps)

Do I have that right? Or is step #3 redundant to step #2?

--Allen


On Apr 6, 2009, at 8:21 AM, Anders F Björklund wrote:

> Ryan Schmidt:
>
>>> Now I know, or think I know, that the correct way to do this is to  
>>> do "port -f destroot" for each dependency, and then "port mdmg  
>>> solfege".  But on which list do I use "port -f destroot", the 86  
>>> member list or the 51?  Is it that, in making a metapackage, I  
>>> only need to worry about runtime dependencies, because build  
>>> dependencies will already be included in the solfege binary?  And  
>>> apparently I've got 51 runtime dependencies, and the rest are  
>>> build deps?  That would all make sense to me, but I'm just  
>>> speculating.
>>
>> I haven't used "port mdmg" myself so I can't advise you  
>> specifically for that.
>>
>> I can explain that a port's build dependencies are only needed to  
>> build the software, not to run it. Therefore, there's no reason to  
>> include build dependencies into the binary mdmg package.
>
> And of course one shouldn't _need_ to do port -f destroot in the  
> first place either, it's just a workaround to the portautoclean  
> default and Ticket #10881...
>
> The trick is to disable "autoclean" before it empties all of the  
> ports destroot, otherwise you need to rebuild everything unless you  
> also enabled "archivemode".
>
>
> # Set whether to automatically execute "clean" after "install" of  
> ports
> portautoclean           no
>
> # Create and use binary archive packages for installation/ 
> reinstallation ease
> portarchivemode         yes
>
> --anders
>