Date: Fri, 21 May 2010 13:26:52 -0400 From: jhell <jhell@DataIX.net> To: dinoex@freebsd.org Cc: ports@freebsd.org Subject: [NEEDS RESOLVE] graphics/netpbm* Message-ID: <alpine.BSF.2.00.1005211253270.5212@pragry.qngnvk.ybpny>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Hi, After a recent upgrade of some ports that require netpbm as a dependency, they compiled and have installed graphics/netpbm on my system. The above is perfectly fine until the point that I realized that it was installed and what I already had was graphics/netpbm-devel on my system. Upon closer inspection of both; one (graphics/netpbm) is the master port and the other (graphics/netpbm-devel) is the slave port or meta-port and neither of these list any CONFLICTS besides the master port listing mgetty-* as a dependency. - From first glance through this matter it seems like these were created to ease the administration of both ports; but can this be done and yet still track CONFLICTS properly ? If so can the conflicts be added to these... If not, can these two ports be separated ? I don't see any convenience having a meta-port for these ports. And yes I know about the WITH_NETPBM_DEVEL=yes, but there is no obvious place where it is documented that you should use this to only get the graphics/netpbm-devel port and if you don't, then you risk installing both when you upgrade any software that requires graphics/netpbm. PS: With how these ports are configured right now if you define WITH_NETPBM_DEVEL=yes and try to upgrade the netpbm-devel installed port it will fail to upgrade itself if graphics/netpbm has a listed CONFLICT?=netpbm-devel-* With all do respect, Regards, - -- jhell - --- Makefile.orig 2010-05-21 12:54:53.241692095 -0400 +++ Makefile 2010-05-21 13:25:36.175294963 -0400 @@ -1,4 +1,4 @@ - -# New ports collection makefile for: netpm-devel +# New ports collection makefile for: netpbm-devel # Date created: 25.May 2006 # Whom: dirk.meyer@dinoex.sub.org # -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.14 (FreeBSD) iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJL9sJjAAoJEJBXh4mJ2FR+MQEH+wTlBES6Vw/3T3WT+a1sHpwU XOtkPhW4Fj7AbrWgWkZK+quvC443go4slHcJXDxVNK4pFWdGNCNoyal+p1IPACo3 bm8On2jI4GnFi9xxYU7/EnV8DpwM4nalxeWTW663zZDvat7ey4cViQaHNhobXQrq LuHgkWW4O8KmXuVQz0vOjs14tSwnIA8SPPJOG40tABYxX95S5/OZ7ceTzUELweyR wt282mF3chGBzW41qirdDk4/kXJkNrUCKC3WQWFRE5iLW1ikTo7ApbX9yN4AXDtI SAOjxWPSRLVn5WLdueSStDlhaG9KKNlSM11Z/lnXxZTvbH1FI6+srY123FfkBsc= =IO/g -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?alpine.BSF.2.00.1005211253270.5212>