From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG  Mon Jul 12 13:52:00 2004
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A2B5A16A4CE
	for <ports@freebsd.org>; Mon, 12 Jul 2004 13:52:00 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from mproxy.gmail.com (mproxy.gmail.com [216.239.56.251])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 936AE43D48
	for <ports@freebsd.org>; Mon, 12 Jul 2004 13:52:00 +0000 (GMT)
	(envelope-from swhetzel@gmail.com)
Received: by mproxy.gmail.com with SMTP id x43so361782cwb
        for <ports@freebsd.org>; Mon, 12 Jul 2004 06:52:00 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.11.98.14 with SMTP id v14mr94691cwb;
        Mon, 12 Jul 2004 06:52:00 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <790a9fff04071206522d1497f4@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 12 Jul 2004 08:52:00 -0500
From: Scot Hetzel <swhetzel@gmail.com>
To: Tom McLaughlin <tmclaugh@sdf.lonestar.org>
In-Reply-To: <1089587801.703.46.camel@compass.straycat.dhs.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References: <40F1AB4F.3050605@domar.pl>
	<1089587801.703.46.camel@compass.straycat.dhs.org>
cc: ports@freebsd.org
cc: Bruno Czekay <bruno@domar.pl>
cc: james@now.ie
Subject: Re: Triple VNC
X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1
Precedence: list
List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD <freebsd-ports.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports>,
	<mailto:freebsd-ports-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-ports>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-ports@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-ports-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports>,
	<mailto:freebsd-ports-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 12 Jul 2004 13:52:00 -0000

> On Sun, 2004-07-11 at 17:04, Bruno Czekay wrote:
> The first problem I see is you install the tightvnc package and it
> creates bin/vncviewer which is a symlink to bin/vncviewer-tight and then
> you install realvnc.  I believe that if you overwrite the existing
> symlink you will overwrite the symlink target.  So by installing
> realvnc's bin/vncviewer you will overwrite tightvnc's
> bin/vncviewer-tight.  I haven't tried this with any ports, simply
> copying files around and copying to the symlink overwrote the target
> file.
>
Several ports are already doing this (or have done this in the past). 
What they did is to change the src Makefile to install the file first
as bin/vncviewer-tight, then create a symlink to bin/vncviewer, in the
pkg-install script.

[ ! -f ${PKG_PREFIX}/bin/vncviewer ] && ln -s
${PKG_PREFIX}/bin/vncviewer-tight ${PKG_PREFIX}/bin/vncviewer

> The second problem I see is which package owns bin/vncviewer?  Both

The first one installed owns the bin/vncviewer link.

NOTE: the pkg-deinstall script would have to check where the link
points, to determine if it should remove the link.  Also if one of the
other ports are installed, it should create a link from the remaining
port to bin/vncviewer.

Scot