Using the regular configure/make/install for a subport belonging to Python portgroup

[Ryan Schmidt]

On Aug 7, 2013, at 15:09, Mojca Miklavec wrote:
>> On 2013-8-8 02:34 , Mojca Miklavec wrote:
>>> 
>>> I'm wondering if it is possible to use a normal configure/make/make
>>> install route for a subport which otherwise belongs to the Python
>>> PortGroup.
>>> 
>>> I would like to create a port which first installs the libraries via
>>> the usual configuration process and then a bunch of subports
>>> py2X-portname that install python support for those libraries. If I
>>> add "PortGroup python 1.0" on top, then setup.py is expected even for
>>> the part that should be installed the usual way.

> Honestly I don't know yet what exactly is needed for the python
> builds. I tried to set the PortGroup inside the subport to get that
> functionality, but it seems to me that this brings more problems than
> it solves (it doesn't set the dependency on the right python version,
> etc.). So I'll split the port into two, even if they share the same
> distfile, version, description, etc.

I've wondered this too, and reached the same conclusion, that it's too difficult to use the python 1.0 portgroup for subports of a main port that doesn't want to use it. Separate ports -- one for the main software, another for its python modules -- seems easiest.