From owner-cvs-ports@FreeBSD.ORG  Fri Jun 24 00:50:48 2011
Return-Path: <owner-cvs-ports@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: cvs-ports@FreeBSD.org
Received: by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix, from userid 1033)
	id C4398106566B; Fri, 24 Jun 2011 00:50:48 +0000 (UTC)
Date: Fri, 24 Jun 2011 00:50:48 +0000
From: Alexey Dokuchaev <danfe@FreeBSD.org>
To: Florian Smeets <flo@FreeBSD.org>
Message-ID: <20110624005048.GA12150@FreeBSD.org>
References: <201106231511.p5NFBIaG008249@repoman.freebsd.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=koi8-r
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <201106231511.p5NFBIaG008249@repoman.freebsd.org>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.1i
Cc: cvs-ports@FreeBSD.org, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org, ports-committers@FreeBSD.org
Subject: Re: cvs commit: ports/www/squid Makefile ports/www/squid30 Makefile
	ports/www/squid31 Makefile
X-BeenThere: cvs-ports@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: CVS commit messages for the ports tree <cvs-ports.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/cvs-ports>,
	<mailto:cvs-ports-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/cvs-ports>
List-Post: <mailto:cvs-ports@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:cvs-ports-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/cvs-ports>,
	<mailto:cvs-ports-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 24 Jun 2011 00:50:48 -0000

On Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 03:11:18PM +0000, Florian Smeets wrote:
> flo         2011-06-23 15:11:18 UTC
> 
>   Modified files:
>     www/squid            Makefile 
>     www/squid30          Makefile 
>     www/squid31          Makefile 
>   Log:
>   change all squid ports from CONFLICTS to CONFLICTS_INSTALL
>   
>   PR:             ports/158194

This makes me wonder about the usefulness of the idea of segregate
CONFLICTS: 1) Why do we need CONFLICTS_(BUILD|INSTALL), and 2) Why do we
check for CONFLICTS before the build, not before installation?  Maybe I am
missing some weird scenario where some port indeed cannot be built in the
presence of another (we have a few cases like that, but they are usually
solved by trivial patching (which is correct: marking ports as conflicting
in this case would simply mask out the problem instead of solving it
properly)?  I also do not understand why we preventively forbid something
which would not fail: every time I try to build something conflicting, I
get this message about "They install files into the same place".  Well, I
am not installing anything yet, am I?  :-)

./danfe