From owner-freebsd-ports  Fri Jan 31 11:04:08 1997
Return-Path: <owner-ports>
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id LAA06648
          for ports-outgoing; Fri, 31 Jan 1997 11:04:08 -0800 (PST)
Received: from Sisyphos.MI.Uni-Koeln.DE (Sisyphos.MI.Uni-Koeln.DE [134.95.212.10])
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id LAA06508;
          Fri, 31 Jan 1997 11:02:21 -0800 (PST)
Received: from x14.mi.uni-koeln.de (annexr2-41.slip.Uni-Koeln.DE) by Sisyphos.MI.Uni-Koeln.DE with SMTP id AA06361
  (5.67b/IDA-1.5); Fri, 31 Jan 1997 20:02:16 +0100
Received: (from se@localhost) by x14.mi.uni-koeln.de (8.8.5/8.6.9) id UAA03672; Fri, 31 Jan 1997 20:02:28 +0100 (CET)
Message-Id: <19970131200227.IW19396@x14.mi.uni-koeln.de>
Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 20:02:27 +0100
From: se@freebsd.org (Stefan Esser)
To: asami@vader.cs.berkeley.edu (Satoshi Asami)
Cc: se@freebsd.org, ports@freebsd.org, committers@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: review request: pkgdir handling improved
References: <19970131183447.YM13263@x14.mi.uni-koeln.de> <199701311823.KAA07993@vader.cs.berkeley.edu>
X-Mailer: Mutt 0.59-PL19
Mime-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <199701311823.KAA07993@vader.cs.berkeley.edu>; from Satoshi Asami on Jan 31, 1997 10:23:26 -0800
Sender: owner-ports@freebsd.org
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

On Jan 31, asami@vader.cs.berkeley.edu (Satoshi Asami) wrote:
> 
>  * Hmmm, no, I don't like this!
>  :
> <rest deleted>
> 
> You didn't read my message (and patch) carefully did you. :>

Yes, sure I did ...

I often get the warning message at the end of an install,
and it was easy enough to ignore. The patch forces me to
set some parameter (in /etc/make.conf), to get rid of the
message for all times, but it used to be good as a warning
to check for files that changed location, and to arrange 
for them to be found by the freshly installed port, too.

Maybe I should have sent the message about the partial
deletion of ports for easier upgrades under a different
subject, since I'm afraid nobody will read *my* mail :)

Anyway: I continue to dislike the change, that makes the 
install fail, if the package has already been registered.
I don't care, whether the test is moved up to before the
install, it is the being forced to take special action to
perform an install that just worked before, that I don't
like ...

Regards, STefan