scope of "local" PortGroup definition files

[Lawrence Velázquez]

On Jan 9, 2015, at 11:36 AM, René J.V. Bertin <rjvbertin at gmail.com> wrote:

> On Friday January 09 2015 07:28:43 Bradley Giesbrecht wrote:
> 
>> If you used svn instead of rsync port sync you would not experience this overwrite issue.
> 
> Until a change to the file in question was pushed, at which time you'd probably get a conflict error?

Yes, you'd have to resolve conflicts in your repository. This happens less often than you'd think. I don't think it outweighs the benefits gained by having a simpler development setup.

> `port sync` updates all sources that aren't marked "nosync" in sources.conf.
> 
> The comments in sources.conf
>> #  To prevent a source from synchronizing when `port sync` is used,
>> #  append [nosync] at the end as shown in this example:
>> #  Example: file:///Users/landonf/misc/MacPorts/ports [nosync]
> suggest that a local repo will also be synced if not marked that way, but from what/where?

From whatever location the local repo uses as its remote. `port sync` just does a Subversion update or Git rebase.

http://trac.macports.org/browser/tags/release_2_3_3/base/src/macports1.0/macports.tcl#L2269

vq