port "cask" -- installing prebuilt binaries
ken.cunningham.webuse at gmail.com
Sun Dec 13 20:15:15 UTC 2020
> So, I'm looking to install iTerm2 for old systems from binary as building
> is becoming increasingly impossible - have we come to a consensus on any of
> Mark E. Anderson <mark at macports.org <https://lists.macports.org/mailman/listinfo/macports-dev>>
> MacPorts Trac WikiPage <https://trac.macports.org/wiki/mark <https://trac.macports.org/wiki/mark>>
> GitHub Profile <https://github.com/markemer <https://github.com/markemer>>
I continue to believe that in general trying to shoehorn "cask" binary
installs as some variant of a port that is generally meant to build from
source is a recipe for nothing but endless trouble. Homebrew has a
completely different subsystem for cask installs that makes it really
clear what you are getting, and this is very desirable, I agree.
IMHO binary-only install port should have some clearly recognizable port
name that does not cause confusion about what it is, and does not
obscure or trample a port's existing variants (which a "prebuilt" or
other similar variant name would do, if there were other variants). We
have port name distinctions for a great many ports in MacPorts now (the
perl, python, php, etc, etc, etc port families, for example). Having a
naming family for binary-only ports is No Big Deal.
Chris has suggested a category inclusion, which is pure and uses
macports unique functionality, but IMHO is unrecognizable for 99.9999%
of users who would never notice that a given port is added to a certain
category or subcategory.
But we should resolve this, as many people want it, whatever is decided
by the managers, who so far have expressed no opinion, ergo it is
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the macports-dev