Date: Fri, 8 Sep 2000 22:51:16 -0700 (PDT) From: Kris Kennaway <kris@FreeBSD.org> To: Steve Price <sprice@hiwaay.net> Cc: Will Andrews <will@physics.purdue.edu>, FreeBSD Ports <ports@FreeBSD.ORG> Subject: Re: PortsNG (was Re: Ports Options Paper) Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.4.21.0009082247430.15227-100000@freefall.freebsd.org> In-Reply-To: <20000909003743.B92984@bonsai.hiwaay.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sat, 9 Sep 2000, Steve Price wrote:
> Sounds pretty easy so let's take this one step further. Let's suppose
> the same libfoo port is updated to a new version and now can also be
> built WITH_ICK. Here's where it gets tricky. Are WITH_BAR and WITH_ICK
> mutually exclusive or can both of them be on at the same time? If the
> former then the new system needs to have the smarts to recognise that
> there is a conflict and do 'something' about it. In the latter case
> we need to have in place the infrastructure to build libfoo, libfoo_bar,
> libfoo_ick, and libfoo_bar_ick.
As I understand the NetBSD system, you would mark the WITH_BAR package as
conflicting with WITH_ICK, and vice versa, so you can't install one if the
other is present. If the conflict is only in the way the two are built,
i.e. they tread on each other's files, then a package combining the two is
quite feasible, which would conflict with the both others.
Yes, it gets complicated when you have several combinations, but them's
the breaks.
Kris
--
In God we Trust -- all others must submit an X.509 certificate.
-- Charles Forsythe <forsythe@alum.mit.edu>
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-ports" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.4.21.0009082247430.15227-100000>