recommended "dependencies?"

Mike Roberts zoarre.37258548 at
Mon Feb 12 09:20:57 PST 2007

In article <fc.004c4c580bdca61f3b9aca00f74d15ae.bdcc8d5 at>,
 "Mark Duling" <mark.duling at> wrote:

> I don't think portfiles that don't represent concrete apps or libraries is
> a good id, and I'm not aware that this has been done before. I would
> think it would create as many problems as it would solve.

fair enough, though i think the functionality is important, particularly 
for selecting between x implementations. how do other port systems solve 
the problem?

> Not sure if
> this applies here, but a port may contain variants that do nothing in the
> port - {}, but they will still select a variant of the same same when
> installing a dependency.  I just used this method for the new
> smokeping/speedycgi ports so that when installing smokeping for Apache 1,
> speedycgi is installed linked against Apache 1 also by using the same
> variant name in both portfiles.  Not sure if that helps at all for what
> you want to do but I thought I'd throw it out just in case.

thanks for letting me know. i experiment with it a bit.


More information about the macports-users mailing list