On Feb 15, 2017, at 15:58, Clemens Lang wrote: > On Wed, Feb 15, 2017 at 09:27:25AM +0100, db wrote: >> It is not, but a local portfile seems to also override a potential >> upgrade. >> >> Any other ways? Should I open a feature request? > > Not aware of any other ways. Feel free to open a ticket, but please > check for an existing one first. > > MacPorts mode of operation also includes always upgrading dependencies > first, so a change like this might get complicated fast. Help would be > very welcome.
I don't think this a feature we could/should implement. MacPorts doesn't currently differentiate between breaking and non-breaking port upgrades. If we implemented this feature, and you were able to exclude port X from upgrading, while still allowing ports P Q R S to upgrade even though they depend on X, then this might work (if the upgrade of X you are excluding is a non-breaking upgrade, such as a minor version upgrade), but it might cause havoc (if the upgrade of X you are excluding is a breaking upgrade, such as a major version upgrade that changes the library version number). We don't want to be responsible for providing support for untangling the breakage you would introduce in such situations. Instead, we should focus our energy on fixing whatever problem is preventing you from upgrading X.
