From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Jul 20 13:38:57 2007 Return-Path: Delivered-To: ports@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 13D3E16A417 for ; Fri, 20 Jul 2007 13:38:57 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from wmoran@collaborativefusion.com) Received: from mx00.pub.collaborativefusion.com (mx00.pub.collaborativefusion.com [206.210.89.199]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BC2BC13C481 for ; Fri, 20 Jul 2007 13:38:56 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from wmoran@collaborativefusion.com) Received: from vanquish.pitbpa0.priv.collaborativefusion.com (vanquish.pitbpa0.priv.collaborativefusion.com [192.168.2.61]) (SSL: TLSv1/SSLv3,256bits,AES256-SHA) by wingspan with esmtp; Fri, 20 Jul 2007 08:58:55 -0400 id 00056417.46A0B18F.00015829 Date: Fri, 20 Jul 2007 08:58:55 -0400 From: Bill Moran To: ports@freebsd.org Message-Id: <20070720085855.99fb2109.wmoran@collaborativefusion.com> Organization: Collaborative Fusion X-Mailer: Sylpheed 2.3.1 (GTK+ 2.10.11; i386-portbld-freebsd6.1) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Subject: Overly restrictive checks in the make process X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 20 Jul 2007 13:38:57 -0000 [root@server /usr/ports/databases/postgresql82-server]# make fetch-recursive ===> Fetching all distfiles for postgresql-server-8.2.4_1 and dependencies ===> postgresql-server-8.2.4_1 cannot install: the port wants postgresql82-client but you have postgresql81-client installed. *** Error code 1 Why? Is there a legitimate reason why the fetch process refuses to download this? I know I've got an older version installed, but why is it preventing me from downloading a newer one? Seems like the IGNORE= check is either being checked too aggressively or that the logic is less sophisticated than it should be. Does anyone know of a reason why this couldn't be changed to allow fetching of conflicting ports distfiles? -- Bill Moran Collaborative Fusion Inc. http://people.collaborativefusion.com/~wmoran/ wmoran@collaborativefusion.com Phone: 412-422-3463x4023