[91578] trunk/dports/x11/xinit/Portfile

[Ryan Schmidt]

On Apr 5, 2012, at 23:32, jeremyhu at macports.org wrote:

> Revision: 91578
>          https://trac.macports.org/changeset/91578
> Author:   jeremyhu at macports.org
> Date:     2012-04-05 21:32:00 -0700 (Thu, 05 Apr 2012)
> Log Message:
> -----------
> xinit: activate the privileged_startx LaunchDaemon, so users don't need to do it manually (or reboot) to get X11 working
> 
> Modified Paths:
> --------------
>    trunk/dports/x11/xinit/Portfile
> 
> Modified: trunk/dports/x11/xinit/Portfile
> ===================================================================
> --- trunk/dports/x11/xinit/Portfile	2012-04-06 01:44:00 UTC (rev 91577)
> +++ trunk/dports/x11/xinit/Portfile	2012-04-06 04:32:00 UTC (rev 91578)
> @@ -4,9 +4,11 @@
> 
> name                xinit
> version             1.3.2
> +revision            1
> categories          x11
> platforms           darwin
> maintainers         jeremyhu openmaintainer
> +license             MIT
> description         X11 startup script processor
> long_description    xinit is responsible for configuring the initial environment \
> 		    when X11 starts up.
> @@ -40,6 +42,8 @@
> configure.args-append   RAWCPP=${configure.cpp}
> 
> post-destroot {
> +	# OS X 10.6.3 was the first version whose native X11 allowed the modern socket naming
> +	# for better X11 server coexistence, so we require it for installing the LaunchAgent
> 	if {${os.platform} == "darwin" && [vercmp ${os.version} 10.3.0] < 0} {
> 		file delete -force ${destroot}/Library/LaunchAgents/org.macports.startx.plist
> 	}

Should this maybe happen in post-activate instead? The buildbot is 10.6.8, but the user's OS version conceivably might not be.

Then again, how would the user know that after they update to 10.6.8 they should rebuild this port? I guess there could be a notes entry.


> @@ -53,4 +57,8 @@
> 		${destroot}${prefix}/bin/font_cache
> }
> 
> +post-activate {
> +	system "launchctl load -w /Library/LaunchDaemons/org.macports.privileged_startx.plist"
> +}

Does a "launchctl unload" need to happen in pre-deactivate then?