Re: auctex depends on emacs but not emacs-devel

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
2 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: auctex depends on emacs but not emacs-devel

Vincent Lefevre
On 2006-03-26 02:22:22 -0500, James Ashenhurst wrote:
> Well, you can always install the non-devel emacs port and just not  
> activate it (that's what port did for me, though I don't recall  
> telling it to do that...).

This is a hack based on a bug in DP, isn't it? Dependencies should
require the ports to be activated, otherwise some needed library
(for instance) provided by a port which isn't activated won't be
found.

--
Vincent Lefèvre <[hidden email]> - Web: <http://www.vinc17.org/>
100% accessible validated (X)HTML - Blog: <http://www.vinc17.org/blog/>
Work: CR INRIA - computer arithmetic / SPACES project at LORIA
_______________________________________________
Darwinports mailing list
[hidden email]
http://www.opendarwin.org/mailman/listinfo/darwinports
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: auctex depends on emacs but not emacs-devel

Vincent Lefevre
On 2006-03-27 17:48:51 +0100, Arnaud Delobelle wrote:
> However the reason why I think that there shouldn't be a variant at  
> all is that auctex only depends on the emacs infrastructure, which is  
> equally provided by emacs (21) or emacs-devel (22).  The proof is in  
> the auctex portfile, whose variant +devel only changes the  
> dependency.  I think ports like auctex should depend on a "virtual  
> port" provided by both emacs and emacs-devel (and potentially other  
> versions of emacs).

I completely agree.

> I have just thought about another reason why there shouldn't be a  
> variant in the case of auctex, and it seems more compelling to me:  
> severeal variants of the same port can be installed at the same time,  
> ok?

But in practice, only one can be activated, since there are some
common files (and DP would complain about that when activating a
port).

> So auctex and auctex +devel could both be installed.  Now  
> imagine I decide to get rid of emacs-devel; in order to do this I  
> need to uninstall auctex +devel, but as they are both physically the  
> same files at the same location, then *both* will be removed, even  
> though port would still believe that auctex is installed.

Since both can't be activated at the same time, there would be no
problem. However, as I've said, a dependency shouldn't be satisfied
when the port is installed, but not activated; the current behavior
does not make sense.

Also, I assume that having to change the variant just because the user
switches from emacs to emacs-devel (or the opposite) is annoying.

--
Vincent Lefèvre <[hidden email]> - Web: <http://www.vinc17.org/>
100% accessible validated (X)HTML - Blog: <http://www.vinc17.org/blog/>
Work: CR INRIA - computer arithmetic / SPACES project at LORIA
_______________________________________________
Darwinports mailing list
[hidden email]
http://www.opendarwin.org/mailman/listinfo/darwinports