Ryan Schmidt <ryandesign <at> macports.org> writes:

On May 6, 2007, at 20:26, Daniel Wolk wrote:

...

I tried installing gtk2 with the following command: port -v install gtk2 It errored out with the following:

...

gtkprintbackendcups.c: In function 'create_pickone_option':... Any ideas?

- What machine are you running this on? - What version of Mac OS X are you using? - Have you installed all Apple software updates for your OS? - Do you have the latest Xcode? (2.4.1 for Mac OS X 10.4.9, 1.5 for 10.3.9) - Do you also have Fink installed?

Not the OP, but I'm seeing the same problem. I've got a fully-updated 10.3.9 on a beige G3 AIO (with a G4 processor upgrade), with 1.510, XCode version 1.5, and no Fink. I've wondered whether there might be a problem with a mismatch of the installed XCode and the version of MacPorts in play here - neither http://www.macports.org/ nor http://trac.macosforge.org/projects/macports/wiki/InstallingMacPorts are particularly helpful in sorting out the question of what 10.3.x needs/can use. I only installed 1.510 (specifically the 10.3 variant) because there appeared to be nothing to contradict doing so and using an earlier version appropriate to the installed XCode. I considered installing the X11 SDK from XCode 2.4.1, perhaps some other parts of it, too, but demurred; why complicate matters? I'm also unclear on the syntax for using variants on the command line; http://trac.macosforge.org/projects/macports/wiki/UsingMacPortsQuickStart is muddy on this subject... Information is not bubbling to the surface.

<markd <at> macports.org> writes:

Michael <gmichaelt <at> gmail.com> writes:

...

I've wondered whether there might be a problem with a mismatch of the installed XCode and the version of MacPorts in play here - neither http://www.macports.org/ nor http://trac.macosforge.org/projects/macports/wiki/InstallingMacPorts are particularly helpful in sorting out the question of what 10.3.x needs/can use. I only installed 1.510 (specifically the 10.3 variant) because there appeared to be nothing to contradict doing so and using an earlier version appropriate to the installed XCode. I considered installing the X11 SDK from XCode 2.4.1, perhaps some other parts of it, too, but demurred; why complicate matters?

There should be a bit more specificity about the assumptions made at your end, or the scope of what interests you. 10.3, implicitly does (at the moment), else there wouldn't be a version specific to it available. But there's a forgotten ignorance at play when macports.org sternly refers to installing XCode 2.4.x, which, it turns out, requires 10.4.2 or higher. One hand should know what the other is doing. Or phrase things in less absolute terms e.g. "ideally,...", etc.. I still wonder whether various parts of the latter version of XCode (e.g. the X11 SDK) can be installed over that version supplied with XC 1.5...

Yes, the install docs don't cover 10.3.

If you keep a last-but-one version (1.4, from what I can see at the moment), is it so hard to archive complete prior versions - docs and all - and make them available on a yer-on-yer-own basis?

...

I'm also unclear on the syntax for using variants on the command line; http://trac.macosforge.org/projects/macports/wiki/UsingMacPortsQuickStart is muddy on this subject...

The QuickStart needs some work, or perhaps some parts can be removed that are handled in the new guide. See if it is better on the subject of variants; I added some on that topic just last night. http://geeklair.net/new_macports_guide/ Look in "Using MacPorts". What isn't clear can be changed so let us know.

A single locus of info would be a great improvement all around - ideally on a single site, but at least something that's been vetted by the same set of eyeballs, or managed, in toto, by one person or group with a stylesheet in mind! Metastasizing FAQs don't help in an already complicated, detail-fussy matter. I'm hoping the info at the link above will eventually be everywhere, or the only "there". I'm heartened to see that the above link begins with a description of the 'what it is' variety - something that's very difficult to find, ironically, on the macports.org site. Still wondering about thte gtk2 install, though.

Michael <gmichaelt@gmail.com> writes:

There should be a bit more specificity about the assumptions made at your end, or the scope of what interests you. 10.3, implicitly does (at the moment), else there wouldn't be a version specific to it available. But there's a forgotten ignorance at play when macports.org sternly refers to installing XCode 2.4.x, which, it turns out, requires 10.4.2 or higher. One hand should know what the other is doing. Or phrase things in less absolute terms e.g. "ideally,...", etc.. I still wonder whether various parts of the latter version of XCode (e.g. the X11 SDK) can be installed over that version supplied with XC 1.5...

This describes a perfect world. In this one even the deep pockets puts less effort into products towards the end of their life cycles. The document you are referring to was only recently made, so the top priority for docs was our largest installed base. Now the top priority is completion of a comprehensive documentation (the new guide) , which happens to be common to all platforms. The news docs have been progressing steadily and may be mostly feature complete fairly soon. At that time tweaking them so they document 10.3 would be fine, though it may require some contributions from people still on 10.3 and that may not happen. But spending time trying to do it now would be negligent since it would make most of our users wait to have even feature completed rough documentation for a few users. If this weren't a volunteer projects priorities could be very different, but in fact they often aren't.

...

Yes, the install docs don't cover 10.3.

If you keep a last-but-one version (1.4, from what I can see at the moment), is it so hard to archive complete prior versions - docs and all - and make them available on a yer-on-yer-own basis?

When we get docs that are even roughly feature complete that would be possible, but the fact is (at least in my opinion) that the Mac community is very, very agressive about upgrading. And I think this is a departure from the communities surrounding the other Unices. We also don't support intalling previous versions of ports and such for similar reasons I think. Our community is different than the others. I like the fact that our community spends more time on new stuff than old, and I happen to think this is a weakness of some of the other Unix communities. That's why our ports tree tend to have newer ports than the others, the reason I came to MacPorts in the first place. All these things supply context to be considered when one says how things "should" be. To perform that "should" requires not doing some things we are doing now. So "should" requires votes behind it before it carries any weight. :)

A single locus of info would be a great improvement all around - ideally on a single site, but at least something that's been vetted by the same set of eyeballs, or managed, in toto, by one person or group with a stylesheet in mind!

Check. The new guide is vetted by one group and has a single CSS stylesheet. The InstallingMacPorts Wiki page is actually unnceccessary now, but I'm waiting to see how we rearrange our web site. Or if that takes too long I'll delete the Wiki page and replace it with a link to the new guide that now contains all the information right at the top.

Metastasizing FAQs don't help in an already complicated, detail-fussy matter. I'm hoping the info at the link above will eventually be everywhere, or the only "there".

All true. I don't like the current FAQs either. I hope many parts may be also deleted after the new guide is done, and the few remaining can be reformatted and clarified. After that, having a different look and feel for the FAQ is not a bad thing because people should know they are not reading official docs. So in the main, I think we'll get down to one guide, one FAQ on the Wiki, some news related stuff on the Wiki, and very little else.

I'm heartened to see that the above link begins with a description of the 'what it is' variety - something that's very difficult to find, ironically, on the macports.org site.

I think the "what it is" type of information is lacking in the whole Unix app world in general. I think it is fairly rare actually. And we know the MacPorts site needs work badly and we're actively seeking those who can redesign it. For free, of course, so it limits the prospective candidates a bit. :) Mark

On Aug 14, 2007, at 07:37, Michael wrote:

Not the OP, but I'm seeing the same problem. I've got a fully- updated 10.3.9 on a beige G3 AIO (with a G4 processor upgrade), with 1.510, XCode version 1.5, and no Fink.

I've wondered whether there might be a problem with a mismatch of the installed XCode and the version of MacPorts in play here - neither http://www.macports.org/ nor http://trac.macosforge.org/projects/macports/wiki/ InstallingMacPorts are particularly helpful in sorting out the question of what 10.3.x needs/can use. I only installed 1.510 (specifically the 10.3 variant) because there appeared to be nothing to contradict doing so and using an earlier version appropriate to the installed XCode. I considered installing the X11 SDK from XCode 2.4.1, perhaps some other parts of it, too, but demurred; why complicate matters?

I'm also unclear on the syntax for using variants on the command line; http://trac.macosforge.org/projects/macports/wiki/ UsingMacPortsQuickStart is muddy on this subject...

Example: To install php5 with support for apache2, select the apache2 variant: $ sudo port install php5 +apache2 To install minivmac with the variant to emulate a Mac SE instead of a Mac Plus, select the macse variant: $ sudo port install minivmac +macse To learn about the variants available for a given port, use the port variants command: $ port variants minivmac