git-core requires rcs?

[Emmanuel Hainry]

Citando Bryan Blackburn :
> On Jan 26, 2007, at 1:42 PM, Ryan Schmidt wrote:
> 
> >On Jan 26, 2007, at 13:34, Bryan Blackburn wrote:
> >
> ...
> >>
> >>You're right, it should compile just fine with a normal 10.4  
> >>install (I'm not sure if rcs, in the BSD package on 10.4, was also  
> >>in BSD in 10.3, which I think was still optional).  The only issue  
> >>is that the dependency claims that it can be resolved by  
> >>installing the rcs port, which doesn't exist.
> >
> >Ah, is that what it means? The portfile says "depends_run ...  
> >bin:merge:rcs ..." Does that mean "I need the binary called merge,  
> >and if there isn't one, install the port rcs"? I'm still muddling  
> >my way through the portfile syntax.
> >
> 
> Yup, that's it; this is the older dependency style, before  
> port:portname became the preferred.  In fact, had this port been  
> upgraded to port:rcs, then it'd definitely break.  I think at this  
> point the few uses for the old bin:program:portname and  
> lib:libname:portname is for big things which we accept as valid pre- 
> installed dependencies like X11.
> 

In fact, this dependency scheme permits to require something that may be
provided by different ports and a preference if it is not found.

I don't think it is really used like that but specifying
bin:psql:postgresql8 would probably be a good idea for dealing with the
many different postgres versions that exist.  I have used it in the
signing-party port because there are 3 different gnupg ports which
probably all install a gpg binary (which is sufficient ofr
signing-party).

Emmanuel 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 186 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.macosforge.org/pipermail/macports-users/attachments/20070128/eed3f237/attachment.bin