Date: Thu, 22 Jul 2010 09:35:30 +0100 From: Matthew Seaman <m.seaman@infracaninophile.co.uk> To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: security/hydra and www/hydra Message-ID: <4C4802D2.9050108@infracaninophile.co.uk> In-Reply-To: <20100721220509.GB23159@lonesome.com> References: <390621279717692@web26.yandex.ru> <86r5iwkciz.fsf@chateau.d.if> <4C472AB1.9070209@yandex.ru> <20100721202111.GE4468@home.opsec.eu> <20100721220509.GB23159@lonesome.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 21/07/2010 23:05, Mark Linimon wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 21, 2010 at 10:21:11PM +0200, Kurt Jaeger wrote:
>>> And is this ok to have two ports with the same name.
>>
>> No, it's bad and should be avoided. I'm pretty sure some
>> portupgrade tool will break.
>
> No, they actually handle it ok. It _is_ confusing to the users, however
> (and, if you go through a raw list of package binaries, You Just Have To
> Know which one's which.)
Doesn't this cause problems for the CVS MODULES stuff? I thought that
was one of the biggest reasons for why port names should be unique.
Cheers,
Matthew
--
Dr Matthew J Seaman MA, D.Phil. 7 Priory Courtyard
Flat 3
PGP: http://www.infracaninophile.co.uk/pgpkey Ramsgate
JID: matthew@infracaninophile.co.uk Kent, CT11 9PW
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4C4802D2.9050108>