Date: Tue, 16 Jun 2009 07:13:42 +0200 (CEST) From: Gerald Pfeifer <gerald@pfeifer.com> To: Jeremy Messenger <mezz7@cox.net> Cc: ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Why not use normal CONFLICTS in lang/gcc43 instead of custom? Message-ID: <alpine.LSU.1.99.0906160709360.29901@acrux.dbai.tuwien.ac.at> In-Reply-To: <op.uvgzawdm9aq2h7@localhost> References: <op.uvgzawdm9aq2h7@localhost>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sat, 13 Jun 2009, Jeremy Messenger wrote: > I am trying to install x11/gnome2 last night and the build has gotten > stop at lang/gcc43, because of conflict with lang/gcc295. But wait, I > don't have lang/gcc295 install. I only have ccache installed that has > put 'gcc295' in /usr/local/libexec/ccache/ and this path is in the front > of my PATH. It caused lang/gcc43 to find it by mistake. I'm afraid you indeed ran into a false positive here, alas there is good news -- see below... > Puzzled me for you to not use the CONFLICTS, so why not use it? If you > really can't use CONFLICTS, then can you use the full path of gcc295? > Thanks. Originally I had CONFLICTS, but that does not work as you may think since it only gets active after the build, at which point the user will have run into the build failure. So, upon request by somone (in portmgr?) I added the current check. Using the full path will not work too well either with different LOCALBASEs though I guess one could check /usr/local, $PREFIX, and $LOCALBASE and consider that good enough. Now for the good news: lang/gcc295 is a living dead. It has not built for some eight, nine months and I have deprecated all dependencies (I think), and plan to yank this port finally now. (If anyone wants to start with that, I'm barely online for the next week, and it would be nice to see the process starting...) Gerald
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?alpine.LSU.1.99.0906160709360.29901>