Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sat, 16 Jan 2010 13:18:15 -0600
From:      Programmer In Training <pit@joseph-a-nagy-jr.us>
To:        freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.org
Subject:   Re: Dislike the way port conflicts are handled now
Message-ID:  <4B5210F7.9060909@joseph-a-nagy-jr.us>
In-Reply-To: <20100116190120.GA59663@guilt.hydra>
References:  <d873d5be1001161001i5d398205hea3d2ec1978ee3f@mail.gmail.com> <20100116190120.GA59663@guilt.hydra>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 2440 and 3156)
--------------enig7919608CB03AF13BBE04F350
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On 1/16/2010 1:01 PM, Chad Perrin wrote:
<snip>
> Best:
>=20
>     check for conflicts early, error out early if there are conflicts s=
o
>     one doesn't waste hours compiling something and checking/installing=

>     dependencies and so on
>=20
> Middling:
>=20
>     check for conflicts late
>=20
> Worst:
>=20
>     don't check for conflicts at all
>=20
> Yeah, sounds about right.
>=20

That does nothing for conflict resolution, though. That's a big concern
for me because in the past, only one distribution of Linux (not having
used any of the BSD's before, cannot comment on them except for what I'm
seeing in this discussion) that I've used seems to handle not only
package dependency with ease and grace, but also conflict resolution (in
the sense that the only time I've had an issue with conflicts was when
an updated package wasn't available or an older required package was
discontinued). I like the fact that FreeBSD checks for conflicts early,
but erroring out without anything really useful is a negative for me.
Instead of erroring out, why not initiate some sort of conflict
resolution (e.g. remove and or update an old port) when the conflict is
first detected? Yes, it may very well mean increased time to install a
package, especially if compiling from source, but I find that a more
elegant solution then just erroring out and requiring yet another manual
step. Of course there could be an option to opt-out of this sort of
behavior too, for those who like the extra steps.

--=20
PIT


--------------enig7919608CB03AF13BBE04F350
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)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/

iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJLUhD9AAoJEENZQ8DH7rW092IH/2iiTGkJfaZXIcpduiD82m4V
I6By25Ie9okE07/fB4GYoVQL/3Jv/LQ0PuZCaG/Vs0Uc6EzMbBlEHR80PApowzrI
HRpUCF53NAHLsI5d0CZsOLBOVeqfGpdiGfO0mYqS9/WoQjRcQFoSiMxfeCSwKLbw
TLxig/p2nXqQxHNIkzPEE6nRYSeG0cUfZCxDpiS1ebwfGbw3p0BKUbTGX2h3GuJZ
jiWTV1EPyxW/pxLgQpS6cFPPSv0AU1tw7NOh1lamSQRfbBMZczYGsDFXSSqPOPfu
9ivroHKcPd126UVLVAiTXc64up5hsnM/gvSyzYOb/khrChWcl6OeqOUf/NcynhQ=
=w7y9
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--------------enig7919608CB03AF13BBE04F350--



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4B5210F7.9060909>