<div dir="ltr"><div class="gmail_extra"><div class="gmail_quote">On Mon, Nov 9, 2015 at 12:10 PM, Artur Szostak <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:aszostak@partner.eso.org" target="_blank">aszostak@partner.eso.org</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><span class="">> considered by MacPorts. The first ports tree that contains a port by<br>
> that name in the order listed in sources.conf will be used. All other<br>
> Portfiles in ports trees listed below that are not considered at all for<br>
> any port action.<br>
<br></span><span class="">>> port install myport @1.2<br>
><br>
> This syntax is not supported for 'port install'. The port with this name<br>
> is installed, you cannot specify a version.<br>
<br>
</span>OK, then given my specific example above, how do I install myport version 1.2 rather than version 3.4? Or conversely, how do I install version 3.4 rather than 1.2? It seems like you are telling me MacPorts will make a random selection and there is no way to control this. If that is the case then surely concurrent multiple versions of Portfiles from different repositories are not properly supported.<br></blockquote><div><br></div><div>As quoted above: the first one found via sources.conf will be used. In this case it will be 3.4. You would need to swap the sources.conf entries to get 1.2.</div><div><br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">OK, I misunderstood the selection mechanism of the port command. How about the following alternative, should that work?<br>
<br>
port install myport and version:1\.2<br>
port activate myport and version:1\.2<br></blockquote><div><br></div><div>No. The first one found via sources.conf will be used; as you specified them that will *always* be 3.4. The other Portfile is effectively invisible; you *cannot* select it.</div><div>If, on the other hand, you had already installed via that Portfile (by swapping sources.conf entries as above), then you could manipulate *that* installation using the @version syntax (and it will use the Portfile stored in the registry from that install, not the one for the currently available version).</div><div><br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">So if the command with the @version syntax is not following the dependencies when using the --follow-dependencies option, then I have a bug?<br></blockquote><div><br></div><div>It follows the dependencies recorded for the specific version that you are removing. If those are incorrect then you have a Portfile bug for that version.</div></div><div><br></div>-- <br><div class="gmail_signature"><div dir="ltr"><div>brandon s allbery kf8nh sine nomine associates</div><div><a href="mailto:allbery.b@gmail.com" target="_blank">allbery.b@gmail.com</a> <a href="mailto:ballbery@sinenomine.net" target="_blank">ballbery@sinenomine.net</a></div><div>unix, openafs, kerberos, infrastructure, xmonad <a href="http://sinenomine.net" target="_blank">http://sinenomine.net</a></div></div></div>
</div></div>