[MacPorts] #48206: qt4-mac, qt5-mac: ports no longer conflict
#48206: qt4-mac, qt5-mac: ports no longer conflict ----------------------+----------------------------- Reporter: devans@… | Owner: michaelld@… Type: defect | Status: new Priority: Normal | Milestone: Component: ports | Version: 2.3.3 Keywords: | Port: qt4-mac qt5-mac ----------------------+----------------------------- While doing some testing relative to #47025, I found that qt4-mac and qt5-mac can now, apparently, be active simultanously without any conflict. The ports still claim that they conflict. Is there any reason why the conflicts statements in these two ports shouldn't be changed to allow simultaneous installation? Doing so allows poppler-qt4-mac and poppler-qt5-mac as proposed in #47025 to build and install in parallel. -- Ticket URL: <https://trac.macports.org/ticket/48206> MacPorts <https://www.macports.org/> Ports system for OS X
#48206: qt4-mac, qt5-mac: ports no longer conflict ------------------------------+------------------------- Reporter: devans@… | Owner: michaelld@… Type: defect | Status: new Priority: Normal | Milestone: Component: ports | Version: 2.3.3 Resolution: | Keywords: Port: qt4-mac qt5-mac | ------------------------------+------------------------- Comment (by michaelld@…): This is true from a certain perspective: qt4 installs into ${prefix} and qt5 into ${prefix}/libexec/qt5-mac. That said, there will be projects which try to auto-detect the Qt install, looking for ${prefix}/bin/qmake and using it if found -- no matter the user's settings otherwise (e.g., QMAKE=${prefix}/libexec/qt5-mac/bin/qmake). So, we're better off just moving Qt4 to be in ${prefix}/libexec/qt4-mac (or something like it). I'm well on my way down that path, and expect to have it done sometime next week. Thus, while we -could- change both ports so that they don't conflict -right now-, I'd be just as happy to wait until my "big commit" is in place & qt4 is moved to its own space. I expect there will be plenty of issues with the "big commit", no matter how hard I try to make it otherwise. I also expect we'll have issues with removing the conflict ... so, why not just wait until there really is no conflict? -- Ticket URL: <https://trac.macports.org/ticket/48206#comment:1> MacPorts <https://www.macports.org/> Ports system for OS X
#48206: qt4-mac, qt5-mac: ports no longer conflict ------------------------------+------------------------- Reporter: devans@… | Owner: michaelld@… Type: defect | Status: new Priority: Normal | Milestone: Component: ports | Version: 2.3.3 Resolution: | Keywords: Port: qt4-mac qt5-mac | ------------------------------+------------------------- Comment (by devans@…): Thanks for the update. This is good news and certainly a better approach. Let me know when it's safe to go ahead. In the meantime, I'll be waiting expectantly. -- Ticket URL: <https://trac.macports.org/ticket/48206#comment:2> MacPorts <https://www.macports.org/> Ports system for OS X
#48206: qt4-mac, qt5-mac: ports no longer conflict ------------------------------+------------------------- Reporter: devans@… | Owner: michaelld@… Type: defect | Status: closed Priority: Normal | Milestone: Component: ports | Version: 2.3.3 Resolution: fixed | Keywords: Port: qt4-mac qt5-mac | ------------------------------+------------------------- Changes (by devans@…): * status: new => closed * resolution: => fixed Comment: Conflict removed in r142934. -- Ticket URL: <https://trac.macports.org/ticket/48206#comment:6> MacPorts <https://www.macports.org/> Ports system for OS X
participants (1)
-
MacPorts