The road to MacPorts 1.8.0

[Joshua Root]

On 2009-6-16 05:18, Ryan Schmidt wrote:
> It's been awhile since 1.7.1 was released, and I've seen many changes go
> into trunk already since then. What still stands in the way of releasing
> 1.8.0?

The Trac roadmap is actually a pretty good indicator. Some of the stuff
in the 1.8.0 milestone could (and probably should) be pushed later, of
course. The only essentials as I see it are Snow Leopard support and a
handful of regressions.

> I believe there was a change which now prevents explicitly selecting
> automatic variants, which was going to be a problem for the fetch code
> the distfiles mirror runs to make sure it fetches the distfiles
> necessary for every variant. Can that be fixed somehow?

Yeah, this is one of the essential regressions.

> I know the GSoC '08 privilege escalation stuff was merged in awhile ago,
> and I saw Josh commit some follow-ups recently. Is that all working now?

Seems OK, though I haven't tested extensively. I'd be happier defaulting
macportsuser to root for this release. Probably needs testing with
non-root-owned installs too. I recall you have a ticket open regarding a
permissions error with this configuration (awaiting further feedback
and/or testing).

> Do we know of anything broken in trunk at the moment?

Distcheck is the other regression that springs to mind.

> How are we with Snow Leopard support? Anything still outstanding? I
> understand Snow Leopard builds things 64-bit by default now instead of
> 32-bit. I'm really not sure what we should be doing about this.

Probably passing a -arch (or -m32/64) flag all the time, and making that
default arch configurable.

> There was a comment that the default universal_archs should be changed
> from "ppc i386" to "i386 x86_64". Presumably this would only be done on
> Intel Macs, and PPC Macs would get "ppc ppc64". Or maybe we would make
> it "i386 x86_64" only on Snow Leopard, since that OS is Intel-only, and
> keep "ppc i386" for Tiger and Leopard.

It's not like 10.6 can't build for ppc, but sure, why not.

- Josh