variants question

[John Labovitz]

On Jan 7, 2007, at 9:35 PM, Daniel J. Luke wrote:

> On Jan 7, 2007, at 9:31 PM, John Labovitz wrote:
>> Hm.  At one point this was not true.  I distinctly remember  
>> needing to add some variant in order to get to WebDAV repos.   
>> Maybe that has changed.  That would be good, as it always seemed  
>> like that should be the default.
>
> Nope, that has never been true (at least for as long as I've  
> maintained the port).
>
> What has been true on a couple of occasions is that either neon or  
> subversion's build system's interaction with neon has been broken  
> (entirely my fault) and so if you built subversion it wouldn't be  
> able to use neon and so you wouldn't be able to access WebDAV  
> repositories (via http or https).

Yes, perhaps that was it.

I just tested it, and sure enough, a regular "port install  
subversion" did contain support for WebDAV, and one with the +no_neon  
lacked that support.

To be honest, I never realized that WebDAV access was provided by  
neon.  There was probably a point where I was trying to trim down the  
requirements to get Subversion installed, and had tried the  
"+no_neon" variant -- and had then lost the WebDAV access.  Or, as  
you point out, the neon build was broken, and I misdiagnosed the  
problem.

Anyway, my apologies for putting out incorrect information.

--John