It is a program. It does actually install a library too, which would be different from the single precision one, not just an additional component. But I don't know how one would use this library. I think it is unlikely anyone has been trying to use the library in double precision for any purpose from this port, because the conflict with the non-double port was not handled properly and so the double port failed to install. And I didn't see any tickets about it.
David On Fri, Dec 11, 2015 at 7:29 PM, Ryan Schmidt <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Dec 10, 2015, at 5:05 PM, David Strubbe wrote: > > > I want to make the "gromacs-double" subport instead just a variant > "gromacs +double" as I don't see any particular reason why both would need > to be co-installed, and it seems clearer this way. > > > > How should one proceed for removing a subport, compared to the procedure > for removing a port? > https://guide.macports.org/#development.practices.rename-replace-port > > Is gromacs a program or a library? > > Would using this hypothetical +double variant change gromacs to be > double-precision, or would it install double-precision components alongside > the standard components which are always available? > > My concern would be that if gromacs is a library that is used by other > software, and if using the hypothetical +double variant changes the > components that are installed (and not just adds additional components), > then that might cause problems for that other software that uses gromacs. > For example, that other software might have been built to expect > single-precision components and might not work with double-precision > components. > > I didn't see any other ports declaring a dependency on gromacs but if it > is a library then it could be used by other software outside of MacPorts, > or in third-party MacPorts repositories. > >
_______________________________________________ macports-dev mailing list [email protected] https://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo/macports-dev
