installing subport from a portdir

[René J.V. Bertin]

On Wednesday June 12 2019 20:31:29 Rainer Müller wrote:

>To know which port is provided by the Portfile in the current directory,
>we would first have to parse it. If a Portfile exists, any port action
>would always be delayed by this parsing in the current directory only to
>check the name. In case of a (syntax) error in this Portfile, it would
>even prevent running any port command at all. This is definitely not a
>good idea.

This reasoning would be fine if it were common to stumble over a Portfile in any directory. I don't think that's a very likely scenario though. And even if it were, it's trivial to unblock that situation by renaming the local Portfile. What is much more likely (IMHO, and it certainly is for me) is that you want to install a port from a tree that you do not have in sources.conf, or that is declared with a lesser priority. I can no longer count the times that I realised I had been building a version that I didn't want to build.

At the very least the port command could warn that it is ignoring a Portfile in the current directory.

>Indeed, 'port upgrade' is the only command that behaves differently.
>However, we were not able to decide what should be the proper behavior.

IMHO that would simply be the aligned behaviour; upgrade from the local Portfile. If I understand correctly it is currently possible to `port destroot` a local Portfile, and then install something else if you run `port upgrade`? If so that'd be a hard error in my book.