From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Jun 27 19:22:26 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 93CD1106566B; Sun, 27 Jun 2010 19:22:26 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from pgollucci@p6m7g8.com) Received: from EXHUB015-4.exch015.msoutlookonline.net (exhub015-4.exch015.msoutlookonline.net [207.5.72.96]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7948E8FC0A; Sun, 27 Jun 2010 19:22:26 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [192.168.1.2] (71.246.240.70) by smtpx15.msoutlookonline.net (207.5.72.103) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 8.2.234.1; Sun, 27 Jun 2010 12:22:26 -0700 Message-ID: <4C27A4ED.2060605@p6m7g8.com> Date: Sun, 27 Jun 2010 15:22:21 -0400 From: "Philip M. Gollucci" Organization: P6M7G8 Inc. User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.0; en-US; rv:1.9.1.10) Gecko/20100512 Thunderbird/3.0.5 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: lev@freebsd.org References: <381214039.20100627220400@serebryakov.spb.ru> In-Reply-To: <381214039.20100627220400@serebryakov.spb.ru> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.0.1 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="------------enigED426AA93080D43E3E3659FD" Cc: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Early CONFLICTS detection is POLA viloation? X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 27 Jun 2010 19:22:26 -0000 --------------enigED426AA93080D43E3E3659FD Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1251 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable make -DDISABLE_CONFLICTS On 6/27/2010 2:04 PM, Lev Serebryakov wrote: > Hello, Freebsd-ports. >=20 > I understand, that this change (ports/137855, bsd.port.mk:1.632) = was made 6 months ago, but I've > noticed it only now (twice in one day!). >=20 > Am I only person, who thinks, that this change is HUGE POLA > violation? >=20 > PR says about "big tarball is downloaded and CONFLICTS are detected > after that," but I've have two more realistic scenarios, when early > conflict detection is VERY annoying. Thry are real-life scenarios, > occured today for me in a row. >=20 > (1) I have `subversion' port installed, and want to `makesum' in > updated subversion-freebsd port directory (because I'm maintainer and > need to update port with new version, which have new tarball). OOPS. > I cannot even download new tarball -- confilct is detected. >=20 > (2) I want upgrade perl from 5.8.x to 5.10.x. Type command: >=20 > #portupgrade -rfo lang/petl5.10 perl-5.8.9_3 >=20 > Ooops, confilct is detected, upgraid failed. GRRRR! >=20 >=20 > Maybe, early conflict detection should only print WARNING, and only > install target should be blocked by it, as everybody used for MANY > years? >=20 --=20 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ 1024D/DB9B8C1C B90B FBC3 A3A1 C71A 8E70 3F8C 75B8 8FFB DB9B 8C1C Philip M. Gollucci (pgollucci@p6m7g8.com) c: 703.336.9354 VP Apache Infrastructure; Member, Apache Software Foundation Committer, FreeBSD Foundation Consultant, P6M7G8 Inc. Sr. System Admin, Ridecharge Inc. Work like you don't need the money, love like you'll never get hurt, and dance like nobody's watching. --------------enigED426AA93080D43E3E3659FD Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (MingW32) iEYEARECAAYFAkwnpO8ACgkQdbiP+9ubjBwA7ACffHBYlkoi0DTyT98/AYXolCHQ 9qgAnRTXNsgNsgggv/39ldSLD13TVCI0 =4MF4 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --------------enigED426AA93080D43E3E3659FD--