From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Feb 5 23:55:32 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 33ADF16A42A for ; Sun, 5 Feb 2006 23:55:32 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from chris@vindaloo.com) Received: from corellia.vindaloo.com (corellia.vindaloo.com [64.51.148.100]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7BE0F43D45 for ; Sun, 5 Feb 2006 23:55:31 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from chris@vindaloo.com) Received: from yavin.vindaloo.com (yavin.vindaloo.com [172.24.144.34]) by corellia.vindaloo.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 741FD12936 for ; Sun, 5 Feb 2006 18:55:30 -0500 (EST) Received: from endaba.vindaloo.com (endaba.vindaloo.com [172.24.145.66]) by yavin.vindaloo.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F11B424F4A for ; Sun, 5 Feb 2006 18:55:29 -0500 (EST) Received: from endaba.vindaloo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by endaba.vindaloo.com (8.13.3/8.13.3) with ESMTP id k15NsWgd079437 for ; Sun, 5 Feb 2006 18:54:32 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from chris@endaba.vindaloo.com) Received: (from chris@localhost) by endaba.vindaloo.com (8.13.3/8.13.1/Submit) id k15NsWqo079436 for freebsd-questions@freebsd.org; Sun, 5 Feb 2006 18:54:32 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from chris) Resent-Message-Id: <200602052354.k15NsWqo079436@endaba.vindaloo.com> X-Original-To: chris@vindaloo.com Delivered-To: chris@vindaloo.com Received: from endaba.vindaloo.com (endaba.vindaloo.com [172.24.145.66]) by yavin.vindaloo.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 58DE324F4A; Sun, 5 Feb 2006 18:50:50 -0500 (EST) Received: from endaba.vindaloo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by endaba.vindaloo.com (8.13.3/8.13.3) with ESMTP id k15Nnqel073719; Sun, 5 Feb 2006 18:49:52 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from chris@endaba.vindaloo.com) Received: (from chris@localhost) by endaba.vindaloo.com (8.13.3/8.13.1/Submit) id k15Nnq81073718; Sun, 5 Feb 2006 18:49:52 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from chris) Date: Sun, 5 Feb 2006 18:49:52 -0500 From: Christopher Sean Hilton To: Conrad Sabatier Message-ID: <20060205234952.GA27334@endaba.vindaloo.com> References: <20060205201004.GA26968@endaba.vindaloo.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="5vNYLRcllDrimb99" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.1i X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.63-csh_yavin_1.0.3 (2004-01-11) on yavin.vindaloo.com X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-4.9 required=4.5 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham version=2.63-csh_yavin_1.0.3 X-filtered: yavin.vindaloo.com Resent-From: Christopher Sean Hilton Resent-Date: Sun, 5 Feb 2006 18:54:32 -0500 Resent-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Cc: Subject: Re: Gnome port X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 05 Feb 2006 23:55:32 -0000 --5vNYLRcllDrimb99 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Sun, Feb 05, 2006 at 02:54:07PM -0600, Conrad Sabatier wrote: >=20 > On 05-Feb-2006 Christopher Sean Hilton wrote: > > Is there a reason that the gnome 2 ports don't use the conflicts > > mechanism to avoid completely hosing an existing gnome 2 install? On > > [snip] > >=20 Let me be more clear because I'm not trying to blame anyone here for a mistake that I made. I am trying find out if there is a way to make it harder for someone else to make the same mistake and perhaps get FreeBSD adhere a little better to my vision of POLA. I have to admit that I was pretty amazed that not only did the gimp port not use the existing gnome2-2.10 ports on my system but that it also tried and _succeeded_ to install the gnome2-2.12 ports over the top of them. To stay on topic: When I look at the Makefile for the gaim port, /usr/ports/net-im/gaim, I see that it has a line: CONFLICTS?=3D ja-gaim-[0-9]* When I look at the port for the japanese language gaim port, /usr/ports/japanese/gaim, I see that it has the line: CONFLICTS=3D gaim-[0-9]* On my system which has the english language gaim port installed if I: # cd /usr/ports/japanese/gaim # make The ja-gaim port builds but installation fails: # make install =3D=3D=3D> Installing for ja-gaim-1.5.0 =3D=3D=3D> ja-gaim-1.5.0 conflicts with installed package(s): gaim-1.3.0_1 They install files into the same place. Please remove them first with pkg_delete(1). *** Error code 1 Stop in /usr/ports/japanese/gaim. *** Error code 1 Stop in /usr/ports/japanese/gaim. # I honestly don't understand why this mechanism cannot be applied to keep newer versions of a port for overwritting older ones. To be perfectly clear: Was this a situation that could be avoided? =20 If it could have been avoided is the CONFLICTS mechanism in ports the right way to do it? If that is the case was there a good reason that this mechanism was not enabled? And, if CONFLICTS is the right way to fix it, is the reason that the problem hasn't been addressed that the port maintainers just don't have enough time? Because if it is I'm probably willing to throw sometime at it so that someone else doesn't have to see the same problem? --Chris --=20 Chris Hilton chris-at-vindaloo-dot-com ------------------------------------------------------------------------ "All I was doing was trying to get home from work!" -- Rosa Parks --5vNYLRcllDrimb99 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (FreeBSD) iQEVAwUBQ+aPH4LaxorQlXotAQJNyAgAu6jl6cdaMB6uFuQNfSu+vnKinNbjxLq8 Ubwgo+ZBd99B8Oukm3u7hhfvsgqm/BovZQFGeJGAMrlHDDfKeykHVbOJrcc08vdF AcgEY3KA3ZdUS1BhHsnqd5ciaPCkQx6icOWOJC9jyk9MAK2MBE2tNxU+M5Mz6oFZ pLOXCHvtvN7+b/8Z1nthxi6uB17OTlLFFZ0pZoKKo9oIH1W5iXoJ4ON8h1LOHDPg 48Yb68+L58nQmDpHMNYoGrWsOeFi/EWcMQXMM8ci+8Z/QsNJZUO8rCJSY+hcBWaI pKktT4xeXTwYD6de7uX+N2YsWs2kU87L4RMYtrR618bxs+GVL3nxTw== =7eoV -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --5vNYLRcllDrimb99--