Date: Thu, 26 Oct 2017 23:15:51 +1100 From: Kubilay Kocak <koobs@FreeBSD.org> To: Rodrigo Osorio <rodrigo@osorio.me> Cc: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org, python <python@FreeBSD.org> Subject: Re: Files conflicts in ports Message-ID: <0c7dc023-cfbc-8942-d818-ff768ed5236f@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <a2ad5a75-6430-e277-9986-15fdf06c567a@osorio.me> References: <c2aa414c-071c-40ae-1c89-25ae6b955091@osorio.me> <4b8e99ea-a9d9-c065-13a6-d54142cb2556@tuxfamily.org> <649b431c-3eba-c1ed-fa70-68a6c19850db@FreeBSD.org> <a2ad5a75-6430-e277-9986-15fdf06c567a@osorio.me>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 10/26/17 11:00 PM, Rodrigo Osorio wrote: > > On 10/26/17 13:45, Kubilay Kocak wrote: >> On 10/26/17 3:58 PM, L.Bartoletti wrote: >>> Hi Rodrigo, >>> >>> Thank you for this precious tool. >>> >>> One question, seeing one of my ports which have conflicts >>> (devel/py-gtfslib >>> http://pkgtool.osorio.me/conflicts/lbartoletti@tuxfamily.org.html). Is >>> it or not good to install test files? >> >> They're all effectively upstream bugs: installing modules into shared >> locations. 'tests' is a common enough module name that its one of the >> most easily observed in practice. >> >> There's nothing intrinsically wrong with tests being installed, but they >> should be under/within their package module directories. >> >> Most projects exclude them (from installation) with something like: >> >> packages = find_packages(exclude=[...]), >> >> Though doing the above for a project with this packaging 'bug' is not >> really the correct solution. Maybe for a short term >> files/patch-setup.py, but report it upstream >> >>> Regards. >>> >>> Loïc >>> >>> On 10.10.2017 20:52, Rodrigo Osorio wrote: >>>> Dear port maintainers, >>>> >>>> It appears that a number of ports install files with the same names at >>>> the same locations, >>>> causing file conflicts and unexpected behaviors for users. >>>> >>>> To help solving this issue I ran a tool to list per maintainer the >>>> conflicting ports with >>>> the list of impacted files ; the list is updated every day at 4am UTC. >>>> >>>> http://pkgtool.osorio.me/conflicts/ >>>> >>>> I believe most of the conflicts are trivial and can be solved with a >>>> proper declaration in the CONFLICTS variable. >>>> So take a look at it and don't hesitate to come back to me if you have >>>> questions. >>>> >>>> best regards, >>>> >>>> - rodrigo >>>> > I agree with Kubilay, If tests aren't relevant for production use the > can be skipped. > The point here is many (if not all) py- packages install the same test > files and this is wrong. > > - rodrigo Just to be explicit, in describing them as upstream bugs, I didn't also mean they're *not* port bugs. The above ports, and any port in fact, that currently install conflicting files, must either: - Add CONFLICTS[_*] with all of their conflicting ports, OR - Not install them This is separate from the issue of value-of-installed-python-tests-for-*package*-users (*ports* users can run them via the sdist in WRKSRC), and separate from the method of resolving the conflict (removal, rename, upstream bug fix, patch, etc) ./koobs
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?0c7dc023-cfbc-8942-d818-ff768ed5236f>