Forcing a variant to a variant

[Bradley Giesbrecht]

I sent my reply to Rainer only.
So hard for me to get use to reply all since this is the only list I'm  
on that does this.
Adding a "reply to: macports" would be so nice.


On Jun 4, 2009, at 5:04 PM, Rainer Müller wrote:

> On 2009-06-05 01:54, Bradley Giesbrecht wrote:
>> There is:
>> /opt/local/etc/macports/variants.conf
>>
>> where you could put:
>> +server
>>
>> and I believe you will get the +server add to all ports that port
>> builds, no?
>
> Yes, that would select +server automatically if available.
>
>> I mentioned recently gentoo's package.mask for masking packages or
>> packages above a version. Personally I'd like something like that in
>> ports.
>
> Masking ports is not too useful if you only got one version as opposed
> to Gentoo where you can choose the version.

It works well for not upgrading things like gcc but I'm thinking  
openssl as well.
I just don't understand how a problem with openssl would be resolved  
in such a way that it broke virtually all my services.

Makes me REALLY REALLY want a feature like gentoo's -p (pretend) where  
port would just tell me what it would do with the command.
I guess there was talk about a port -y (dry run) command.

port upgrade installed
The following ports would be upgraded:
	libxxx at 0.9.3 => libxxx at 0.9.4
The following ports would be installed
	openssl at 0.9.xf
The following ports woud be uninstalled
	openssl at 1.0.x-beta

I'd feel much better adding a "-vp" to all my install, uninstall,  
upgrade, activate and deactivate commands BEFORE actually effecting  
the filesystem.

//Brad
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.macosforge.org/pipermail/macports-dev/attachments/20090604/c60124b7/attachment.html>