"concurrent" qt4-mac: request feedback & testing for current port phase in Portfile?

[Ryan Schmidt]

On Dec 10, 2014, at 8:17 AM, René J.V. Bertin wrote:

> On Wednesday December 10 2014 06:43:28 Ryan Schmidt wrote:
> 
>> Not as a solution I would feel comfortable committing, no. Variants that change where files are installed are bad for dependent ports that need to know where the files are.
> 
> Well, the change in location doesn't appear to pose any problem as long as ports use the variables from the Qt4 PortGroup and don't provide their own hard-coded paths (like port:qca did...). And as far as ports only use either cmake or qmake, everything works fine because those tools are conceived to set up the build system appropriately.
> The thing is, if ever we want to allow Qt4 and Qt5 to be present at the same time, the installation location will *have* to change, and dependent ports will have to comply with that.

Yes, but not by using variants. MacPorts doesn't have the capability to declare a dependency on a variant (ticket #126) and I'm still not convinced that that should ever change.

> It was never my intention to introduce definitive Qt4-kde and Qt5-kde ports that would exist next to either qt4-mac or qt5-mac and impose double installation of all Qt extensions/plugins used by both pure Qt apps and KDE apps.
> Not to mention the fact that with qt4-mac present it would be impossible to build qt5-kde.
> 
> In short: do you have a better idea? I must admit that apart from the include directory I haven't looked too hard at other shared directories that could be under ${prefix}/share/${qt_name} rather than ${prefix}/libexec/${qt_name}/share ...