From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Mar 9 19:24:03 2010 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7FBEB106564A for ; Tue, 9 Mar 2010 19:24:03 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from gary.jennejohn@freenet.de) Received: from mout7.freenet.de (mout7.freenet.de [IPv6:2001:748:100:40::2:9]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 17DA28FC12 for ; Tue, 9 Mar 2010 19:24:03 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [195.4.92.20] (helo=10.mx.freenet.de) by mout7.freenet.de with esmtpa (ID gary.jennejohn@freenet.de) (port 25) (Exim 4.72 #1) id 1Np529-00045H-TD; Tue, 09 Mar 2010 20:24:01 +0100 Received: from p57ae211e.dip0.t-ipconnect.de ([87.174.33.30]:54666 helo=ernst.jennejohn.org) by 10.mx.freenet.de with esmtpa (ID gary.jennejohn@freenet.de) (port 25) (Exim 4.72 #2) id 1Np529-00057B-Ku; Tue, 09 Mar 2010 20:24:01 +0100 Date: Tue, 9 Mar 2010 20:24:00 +0100 From: Gary Jennejohn To: Charlie Kester Message-ID: <20100309202400.65ca1e86@ernst.jennejohn.org> In-Reply-To: <20100309190124.GA48403@comcast.net> References: <47B3280E-2609-476D-92EA-BC940C8C49D3@freebsd.org> <20100309192514.49a88a53@ernst.jennejohn.org> <20100309190124.GA48403@comcast.net> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.7.4 (GTK+ 2.16.2; amd64-portbld-freebsd9.0) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Ports with same name X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list Reply-To: gary.jennejohn@freenet.de List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 09 Mar 2010 19:24:03 -0000 On Tue, 9 Mar 2010 11:01:24 -0800 Charlie Kester wrote: > On Tue 09 Mar 2010 at 10:25:14 PST Gary Jennejohn wrote: > >On Tue, 9 Mar 2010 10:23:51 -0500 > >Steven Kreuzer wrote: > > > >> Hello- > >> > >> As documented in http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=ports/144277 > >> we have two ports with the same name: > >> > >> Port: gag-2.9 > >> Path: /usr/ports/security/gag > >> Info: A stacheldraht (DOS attack) agent detector > >> Maint: ports@FreeBSD.org > >> B-deps: > >> R-deps: > >> WWW: http://www.washington.edu/People/dad/ > >> > >> Port: gag-4.9 > >> Path: /usr/ports/sysutils/gag > >> Info: Graphical Boot Manager > >> Maint: alepulver@FreeBSD.org > >> B-deps: > >> R-deps: > >> WWW: http://gag.sourceforge.net/ > >> > >> I am looking for some advice on whats the best course of action to deal with this. > >> > >> My gut feeling is that sysutils/gag should remain the same and that security/gag should be > >> renamed to security/gag-stacheldraht. > >> > >> Anyone vehemently opposed to this? > >> > > > >So where's the problem? sysutils/gag doesn't seem to install a binary > >which would conflict with security/gag. In fact, it doesn't seem to > >install an executable at all, based on examining the Makefile and > >pkg-plist. > > Could be a problem for tools like portmaster that allow the user to > specify the port name only, rather than category/portname. > > If a user has both gags installed and then runs "portmaster gag", how > should portmaster resolve the ambiguity? > By examining the ORIGIN tags in +CONTENTS and asking the user which one to update? IMO this is a putative problem which shouldn't be "fixed" by renaming a port. But I'm just a lowly ports committer and not a member of portmgr. --- Gary Jennejohn