clean install simulation mode?

[René J. V. Bertin]

Ryan Schmidt wrote:


> Maybe if you describe the problem the user is experiencing, we can figure out
> why it's happening without needing to do what you're proposing.

Thanks, I appreciate that.

I'm still trying to figure out what that problem is... From what I know he had my 
port:qt5-kde installed, and then for some reason ran into a dependency when he 
tried to install port:kf5-kate that started pulling in the official port:qt5-
qtbase (and family), which created a conflict.

I don't know what dependency that was (he only ever provided the main.log for 
qt5-qtbase, which of course doesn't tell me why that port was installed). But he 
assured me that he followed the instructions and copied my Qt5 PortGroups into 
the main ports tree. That alone should have prevent this from happening.

He then reported the results of `port rdeps` without any ports installed (or 
active, I don't know). That indeed shows port:qt5-qtbase as a dependency of 
kf5-kate -> kf5-kinit -> kf5-kio -> kf5-knotifications -> phonon-qt5

I also know he's installing into a non-standard prefix and without using sudo at 
all, but that shouldn't really make any difference here.

The important thing here is that AFAIK he already had port:qt5-kde installed 
when he first ran into the conflict. That's the recommended way of installing my 
KF5 ports; port:qt5-kde is conceived to act as an alternative in the way -devel 
ports do (but with PortGroup support for rewriting depspecs that goes a bit 
beyond the usual path:-style depspecs). So even if there's indeed a pending 
issue with complex installs-from-scratch (assuming the deps tree is calculated 
only once) that was not the issue at hand according to my information.

This is the issue ticket:
https://github.com/RJVB/macstrop/issues/9

and the related https://trac.macports.org/ticket/54386 which I just filed 
(complete with proofreading failure in the subject :-/)

R.