[rkward-devel] [rkward-cvs] SF.net SVN: rkward-code:[4787] trunk/rkward/macports/kde

[Thomas Friedrichsmeier]

Hi,

On Wednesday 30 April 2014 18:17:42 meik michalke wrote:
> Am Mittwoch, 30. April 2014, 10:01:10 schrieb Thomas Friedrichsmeier:
> > > move ahead to 0.6.2?
> > 
> > I think the fastest (and therefore preferrable) fix will be to add the
> > relevant patch to the portfile. Patch attached (combination of r4654,
> > r4657, and r4660).
> 
> thanks -- that fixed the build problem.

good. So does that mean, we don't have to depend on a particular compiler 
version anymore?

> we would need another patch for the stable binary subport, because the
> configure argument R_LIBDIR is being ignored, so RKWard doesn't find the
> rkward package and crashes ;-) however, if that doesn't become a part of
> MacPorts anyway, we shouldn't have to bother.

Yes, let's ignore this for now, and leave it for 0.6.2. (BTW, one other thing 
that I really want to fix for 0.6.2 is the troubles running from paths with 
spaces on Windows).

> > 1) Get the portfiles done.
> 
> looks good so far. the comments from various MacPorts devs were helpful in
> removing old stuff which doesn't seem to be needed any longer. the files
> will be much smaller now.

Two more suggestions: I guess the main use-case for rkward-binary is going to 
remain building the bundles. It _may_ make sense to have a third Portfile just 
for rkward-binary, and adjust that to point to the correct SVN-location (trunk 
or release_branch) as needed (could that even be implemented as a variant?). 
The advantage would be that the regular Portfiles could remain completely in 
sync with MacPorts, making it easier to carry patches in either direction.

Now that the -debug variant does not need any explicit configure arguments 
anymore, it does look somewhat pointless, indeed. Telling bug reporters to

sudo port install rkward +debug
sudo port install valgrind

should not be too much more scaring than just the first line.

Regards
Thomas

P.S.: Marko was addressing me when asking for Portfile patches, but as you are 
the maintainer, I'm not going to take any action here, unless you tell me to.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
URL: <http://mail.kde.org/pipermail/rkward-devel/attachments/20140501/59c31045/attachment.sig>