loading checksums table from pre-checksum block?

[Ken Cunningham]

On 2018-10-27, at 3:52 PM, Ryan Schmidt wrote:

> 
> 
> On Oct 27, 2018, at 17:37, René J.V. Bertin wrote:
> 
>> No, I do not want to reintegrate the 60-some checksums into the portfile, I don't want to split it up and I don't want to rewrite my checksum generator script either. My question was how I can make the source command apply globally.
>> 
>> Or if it's more politically correct, why doesn't the source command run in the global scope while it's perfectly possible to set variables in there - you don't even have to declare them global.
>> 
>> What I'm doing isn't really all that different from how patchfiles work: those are also external files that aren't copied into the registry (last I looked, this morning) and there too this doesn't create issues because they're not used when running the copy from the registry.
> 
> MacPorts used to have an include statement, but it was removed in MacPorts 1.9.0 when we started storing Portfiles in the registry. If you want to see how it worked, you can look at the commit where it was removed:
> 
> https://trac.macports.org/changeset/68206
> 
> We could re-add it, or maybe change the source command to work how the include command used to work. But I'm not convinced that we should do that. There aren't many reasons why an include file would be useful, and we evidently haven't needed it for the past 8 years. Rainer used it in a few of his ports before it was removed; I don't think any other developers did.
> 
> 


I've written a few portfiles for my own use where i use "source" for simplicity -- 

like my libsdl2 for PPC port, for example, where I use a totally different Portfile for PPC than for Intel, and so I source the one I want to use (stored in the files dir) from a Portfile stub.

But so far there are always other ways around those tricks..

Ken