[111271] trunk/dports/science/ocaml-mpi/Portfile

[Lawrence Velázquez]

On Sep 18, 2013, at 10:45 PM, "Eric A. Borisch" <eborisch at macports.org> wrote:

> On Wednesday, September 18, 2013, Ryan Schmidt wrote:
> 
>> This is concerning, because it means the port builds differently depending
>> on what ports the user already has installed. This won't work right if the
>> user gets a pre-compiled package from the buildbot and is generally a bad
>> idea.
> 
> True, but the only people it will be any issue for are those that have
> intentionally installed mpich-devel-default, and for those, rev-upgrade
> will rebuild it locally (the libs are in different locations; no chance of
> something subtle slipping by.) The two potential satisfying ports conflict
> with each other, so only one can possibly be installed.
> 
> These are people who have chosen to go off the beaten path intentionally.
> 
> Your thoughts?

I am not comfortable with this idea of depending on rev-upgrade to ensure correct port installation.

Users might disable rev-upgrade for any number of reasons, and even if they haven't, there's no guarantee that they know what's going on when it runs and rebuilds a bunch of ports for no apparent reason.

And it sets the bad precedent that it's okay for "port install foo +abc +def" to install different things on different systems.

vq