From owner-freebsd-emulation@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Jun 3 18:06:22 2009 Return-Path: Delivered-To: emulation@FreeBSD.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CA947106564A for ; Wed, 3 Jun 2009 18:06:22 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from glarkin@FreeBSD.org) Received: from mail1.sourcehosting.net (113901-app1.sourcehosting.net [72.32.213.11]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A79138FC1C for ; Wed, 3 Jun 2009 18:06:21 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from glarkin@FreeBSD.org) Received: from 68-189-245-235.dhcp.oxfr.ma.charter.com ([68.189.245.235] helo=cube.entropy.prv) by mail1.sourcehosting.net with esmtp (Exim 4.69 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1MBuqt-000OQs-79; Wed, 03 Jun 2009 14:06:20 -0400 Received: from [127.0.0.1] (fireball.entropy.prv [192.168.1.12]) by cube.entropy.prv (Postfix) with ESMTP id 01B3A2F66659; Wed, 3 Jun 2009 14:06:14 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <4A26BB95.7010002@FreeBSD.org> Date: Wed, 03 Jun 2009 14:06:13 -0400 From: Greg Larkin Organization: The FreeBSD Project User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.21 (Windows/20090302) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Boris Samorodov References: <4A242BF1.9050202@FreeBSD.org> <22672149@h30.sp.ipt.ru> In-Reply-To: <22672149@h30.sp.ipt.ru> X-Enigmail-Version: 0.95.7 OpenPGP: id=1C940290 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Score: -0.5 (/) Cc: emulation@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: Fix for CONFLICTS in emulators/linux_base ports X-BeenThere: freebsd-emulation@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list Reply-To: glarkin@FreeBSD.org List-Id: Development of Emulators of other operating systems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 03 Jun 2009 18:06:23 -0000 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Boris Samorodov wrote: > (Seems I've got this mail by private email and send an answer. > but for archieves I'll duplicate it here.) > > On Mon, 01 Jun 2009 15:28:49 -0400 Greg Larkin wrote: > >> Hi emulation team, > >> I'm working on a PR for graphics/linux-ac3d, and it required me to >> upgrade my linux_base-fc-4_14 package. I noticed that the newer >> linux_base-f ports don't include the correct package name in CONFLICTS >> for the older port. > > Thanks for taking care of it. I should have done it myself but > you know there are always other first-aid-things to do... :-( > >> I have included a patch for the ports that you maintain. Please review >> it when you have a moment and let me know what you think. > >> http://people.freebsd.org/~glarkin/diffs/bsam-linux_base.diff > > Some thoughts: > . I'm not sure if names without * can match anything (and > anyway if they do, ex. linux_base-fc will match linux_base-fc6, > the third diff); > . there are more linux_base ports now (including linux_base-f9, > linux_base-f10). They should be included into CONFLICTS and > their CONFLICTS should be considered either. > > Thanks once more! > > > WBR Hi Boris, I sent two emails with two separate patches, one directly to you and one to emulation@, since I wasn't sure who is a member of that alias. Sorry for the confusion on my end. Perhaps there is a very simple solution - do you think that all linux_base ports should have the following CONFLICTS line? CONFLICTS= linux_base-* That way, all Linux emulation layers will conflict with every other one, and we'll be covered for any future revisions. Let me know what you think, and I can commit the changes after generating a new patch for your review, if you like. Cheers, Greg - -- Greg Larkin http://www.FreeBSD.org/ - The Power To Serve http://www.sourcehosting.net/ - Ready. Set. Code. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (MingW32) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFKJruV0sRouByUApARAgSxAKCAjd2C0/hp8bYkwd9PzlhQZz+5lgCgyGkV N/xt9rbW7CkIdQsct9ScY0Y= =GFGg -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----