Hello, As the recent discussions on this list concluded, each port should enable by default most of the features common user may want. Another thing i believe would be good is that lib ports with doxygen documentation should have a doc variant that build it. But, one thing i don't understand is that if you want to build doxygen, you must install X11 for the ghostscript dependency. Shouldn't ghostscript X11 support be a variant of the port? I don't think users who are just willing to build some API documentation want X11 installed. Regards, -- Anthony Ramine, the infamous MacPorts Trac slave. nox@macports.org
Citando N_Ox :
Hello,
As the recent discussions on this list concluded, each port should enable by default most of the features common user may want. Another thing i believe would be good is that lib ports with doxygen documentation should have a doc variant that build it.
But, one thing i don't understand is that if you want to build doxygen, you must install X11 for the ghostscript dependency. Shouldn't ghostscript X11 support be a variant of the port? I don't think users who are just willing to build some API documentation want X11 installed.
People who install ghostscript as a dependency for teTeX are likely to prefer it linked with X11 libraries. I thought that doxygen had a pdf backend that would not rely on ghostscript, but it seems (according to port deps) that it relies on TeX, so...) ghostscript being used by different projects which target different audiences, the most feature-rich it is the less unhappy people there should be. However, a no_x11 (or disable_x11_support as some may prefer) variant should be possible to implement. Emmanuel
On Sep 6, 2007, at 11:20, Emmanuel Hainry wrote:
People who install ghostscript as a dependency for teTeX are likely to prefer it linked with X11 libraries. I thought that doxygen had a pdf backend that would not rely on ghostscript, but it seems (according to port deps) that it relies on TeX, so...)
ghostscript being used by different projects which target different audiences, the most feature-rich it is the less unhappy people there should be.
However, a no_x11 (or disable_x11_support as some may prefer) variant should be possible to implement.
I trust nobody will prefer "disable_x11_support" as we currently have no portfiles that use that variant name. In contrast, we currently have 10 portfiles that define "no_x11" variants and 2 that define "nox11" variants.
Le 6 sept. 07 à 23:04, Ryan Schmidt a écrit :
On Sep 6, 2007, at 11:20, Emmanuel Hainry wrote:
People who install ghostscript as a dependency for teTeX are likely to prefer it linked with X11 libraries. I thought that doxygen had a pdf backend that would not rely on ghostscript, but it seems (according to port deps) that it relies on TeX, so...)
ghostscript being used by different projects which target different audiences, the most feature-rich it is the less unhappy people there should be.
However, a no_x11 (or disable_x11_support as some may prefer) variant should be possible to implement.
I trust nobody will prefer "disable_x11_support" as we currently have no portfiles that use that variant name. In contrast, we currently have 10 portfiles that define "no_x11" variants and 2 that define "nox11" variants.
I understand that NLS is something that should be enable by default in ports. However I don't think X11 is something everyone user wants, it is a huge dependency and I think its support should not be deactivated in a negative variant, but enable in a positive one, which would add support. Short version: +x11 > +no_x11. -- Anthony Ramine, the infamous MacPorts Trac slave. nox@macports.org
On Sep 6, 2007, at 17:26, N_Ox wrote:
I understand that NLS is something that should be enable by default in ports. However I don't think X11 is something everyone user wants, it is a huge dependency and I think its support should not be deactivated in a negative variant, but enable in a positive one, which would add support.
Short version: +x11 > +no_x11.
You shouldn't make that blanket statement about all ports. I can speak for the graphviz port. In order to provide beautiful antialiased bitmapped rendering, it requires the pango and cairo libraries, which require the X libraries. Building without X by default would mean that graphviz produces ugly aliased output, and furthermore cannot generate PDFs. The "best" graphviz is one that includes these features, therefore in graphviz, the variant is no_x11. Other ports may choose to have an x11 variant as you suggest if the absence of X does not significantly impact the port. I count 29 ports which currently define an "x11" variant. X11 is not such a big dependency if you will just install Apple's X11, which I recommend. It's quite painless to do so. Just install X11User.pkg from the Mac OS X DVD and X11SDK.pkg from the Xcode disk image and the dependency is satisfied.
participants (3)
-
Emmanuel Hainry
-
N_Ox
-
Ryan Schmidt