[PATCH] system_x11 variant

[Bryan Blackburn]

On Sat, Jan 03, 2009 at 10:28:48AM -0800, Jeremy Huddleston said:
> Last week, I mentioned the idea of a system_x11 variant which would allow 
> users to continue using their ${x11prefix} X11SDK.  Below is a patch that 
> I'd like to get reviewed.  I've tested it, and it works here on Leopard.  
> I suspect xorg-libXcomposite (and others that aren't installed on Tiger) 
> probably need some additional pkgconfig-foo to find X11 (see the bottom of 
> xinit/Portfile if you're curious what I mean).
>
> This is essentially step 1 towards transitioning all ports to using  
> dependencies like "port:xorg-libXext port:xorg-libXaw" instead of  
> "lib:libX11:XFree86" or "lib:libXext.6:xorg-libXext lib:libXaw:xorg- 
> libXaw"
>
> This has the benefit of allowing us to develop against an identical X11 
> setup on all platforms while allowing expert users to set a variant if 
> they really don't want to use our X11 libraries.  Additionally, with this 
> variant set, we are better off that our current situation because we won't 
> install an X11 library into ${prefix} after a macports binary was already 
> linking against the one in ${x11prefix} (this is the main problem behind 
> http://trac.macports.org/ticket/17558 ).

Two ports look odd: xorg-libs, which tests for libs.dylib (and being a
meta-port, probably not meant at all here?); and xorg-libpthread-stubs
which tests for libpthread-stubs.dylib that I don't see in Xquartz
(2.3.2.1).

Also, I'm curious about why you override the archive and activate phases in
these (as well as the X11 meta-ports xorg, xorg-apps, xorg-fonts, xorg-libs,
and xorg-proto).  Overriding activate causes them to be installed but then
remain inactive, and hence show in 'port installed inactive' as well as
possiblity causing confusion for those who use 'port uninstall inactive'.

Bryan

[...]