Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Mon, 8 Jun 2009 01:00:37 +0100
From:      RW <rwmaillists@googlemail.com>
To:        ports@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: [x11/nvidia-driver] conflicts with linux dri ports
Message-ID:  <20090608010037.3c3623d6@gumby.homeunix.com>
In-Reply-To: <81475023@h30.sp.ipt.ru>
References:  <KKVVQ5$55042A577C09ABEBE07BC00F05F0FD24@libero.it> <81475023@h30.sp.ipt.ru>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, 08 Jun 2009 00:06:56 +0400
Boris Samorodov <bsam@ipt.ru> wrote:

> On Sun,  7 Jun 2009 21:34:53 +0200 barbara wrote:
> 
> > > I've just received a report at emulation@ about x11/nvidia-driver
> > > and other linux dri ports to be in conflict.
> > > 
> > > If a linux dri port is installed x11/nvidia-driver seems to
> > > replace libGL.so with a link to nvidia library. Not good. Is it
> > > right to mark this port and other linux dri ports to be in
> > > conflict?
> 
> > Why it's not good?
> > I'm not sure I've understood, but I think it's more or less the
> > same with the native counterpart: if you install x11/nvidia-driver,
> > libGL.so from graphics/libGL get replaced (actually renamed).
> 
> Because if port B replaces a file from port A, then when port A is
> deinstalled, the file from the ports B is removed.

It's not ideal, but making nvidia-driver conflict with its own
dependencies is a lot worse.



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20090608010037.3c3623d6>