variants

[Bradley Giesbrecht]

> On Mon, Apr 11, 2016 at 11:47 AM, Daniel J. Luke <dluke at geeklair.net <mailto:dluke at geeklair.net>> wrote:
> On Apr 10, 2016, at 4:01 AM, Takeshi Enomoto <takeshi at macports.org <mailto:takeshi at macports.org>> wrote:
> > If there is a reason behind treating default_variants and manually set variants,
> > I’d like to know.
> 
> I'm not sure what the initial reasoning was, but I think the current behavior is correct.
> 
> When a port is installed as a dependency of some other port, it should be installed the same way as if it were installed manually first.
> 
> ie. A requires B:
> 
> port install A
> and
> 
> port install B && port install A
> 
> should result in the same final install.
> 
> On Apr 11, 2016, at 12:29 PM, David Strubbe <dstrubbe at macports.org> wrote:
> 
> Well, that is not the current behavior if a variant is specified manually. What happens is:
> 
> port install A +var
> 
> does
> 
> port install B +var && port install A +var.
> 
> Why do you think it would be inappropriate to do that for default variants?

Binaries are only provided for default variants so you might loose binary packages for dependencies due to variants you don’t care about in the dependency.


Regards,
Bradley Giesbrecht (pixilla)


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.macosforge.org/pipermail/macports-dev/attachments/20160411/d2af461b/attachment.html>