Date: Sun, 17 Jan 2010 10:41:47 -0500 From: "b. f." <bf1783@googlemail.com> To: Martin Wilke <miwi@freebsd.org> Cc: glarkin@freebsd.org, pav@freebsd.org, freebsd-questions@freebsd.org, portmgr@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Dislike the way port conflicts are handled now Message-ID: <d873d5be1001170741r43207e0ehbabb3c511c230f5b@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <20100117124506.1563d9ad@miwi.homeunix.com> References: <d873d5be1001161001i5d398205hea3d2ec1978ee3f@mail.gmail.com> <4B520C71.9080301@FreeBSD.org> <1263673588.1541.60.camel@hood.oook.cz> <4B524584.9050909@FreeBSD.org> <1263725045.1541.66.camel@hood.oook.cz> <20100117124506.1563d9ad@miwi.homeunix.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--0016e6d78475193ac7047d5e13c8 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-2 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On 1/17/10, Martin Wilke <miwi@freebsd.org> wrote: > On Sun, 17 Jan 2010 11:44:05 +0100 > Pav Lucistnik <pav@FreeBSD.org> wrote: > >> Greg Larkin p=ED=B9e v so 16. 01. 2010 v 18:02 -0500: >> >> I will agree that `portupgrade -o` is way too useful feature. >> I'd vote for reverting to the old behaviour. >> portupgrade and other tools can easily be patched to work with the new behavior, by defining DISABLE_CONFLICTS for the targets preceding installation. Since the new behavior is generally more efficient, and safer, and since the people who will need to defer the check for some reason are in the minority, I vote that we keep the new behavior, and offer a chance to opt out of it with something like the attached patch. I didn't add any extra warnings, since I assumed that those who choose to defer the checks already know that this may lead to problems in some cases. b. >> > I thought portmgr might have some insight into additional reasons >> > for making the change, such as fixing a problem with pointyhat >> > builds, etc. At the moment, I'm neutral on the change, since it >> > hasn't caused me any grief, but I did some research for the folks >> > who posted the original questions. >> >> It was done because someone thought it is a good idea and submitted a >> PR about it. >> > > Howdy, > > For some ports is the conflict check too late see example here. > > http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-gecko/2009-December/000577.htm= l > > I agree that we need a new pre-fetch hook in bsd.port.mk if a conflict > present is. But that need a bit work and it is on my todo list... > > - Martin > --0016e6d78475193ac7047d5e13c8 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; name="bsd_port_mk_conflicts_diff.txt" Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="bsd_port_mk_conflicts_diff.txt" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 X-Attachment-Id: file0 LS0tIGJzZC5wb3J0Lm1rLm9yaWcJMjAxMC0wMS0xNyAwOTo0NjowOS4wMDAwMDAwMDAgLTA1MDAK KysrIGJzZC5wb3J0Lm1rCTIwMTAtMDEtMTcgMTA6MzY6MDIuMDAwMDAwMDAwIC0wNTAwCkBAIC01 NDEsNiArNTQxLDEwIEBACiAjCQkJCSAgcGF0dGVybiBtZXRhLWNoYXJhY3RlcnMgIioiLCAiPyIs ICJbIiwgIl0iLCBhbmQgIiEiLgogIwkJCQkgIEV4YW1wbGU6IGFwYWNoZSotMS4yKiBhcGFjaGUq LTEuMy5bMDEyMzQ1XSBhcGFjaGUtKitzc2xfKgogIworIyBMQVRFX0NPTkZMSUNUUwktIElmIHNl dCwgdGhpcyBwb3J0IHdpbGwgZGVmZXIgdGhlIGNoZWNrIGZvciBjb25mbGljdHMgdW50aWwgaW1t ZWRpYXRlbHkKKyMJCQliZWZvcmUgdGhlIGluc3RhbGwgdGFyZ2V0LCB0byBhbGxvdyBjb25mbGlj dGluZyBwb3J0cyB0byBiZSBmZXRjaGVkIGFuZCBidWlsdC4KKyMJCQlUaGlzIG1heSBleHBvc2Ug YnVpbGQgZXJyb3JzIGR1ZSB0byB0aGUgcHJlc2VuY2Ugb2YgY29uZmxpY3RpbmcgcG9ydHMuCisj CiAjIFZhcmlvdXMgZGlyZWN0b3J5IGRlZmluaXRpb25zIGFuZCB2YXJpYWJsZXMgdG8gY29udHJv bCB0aGVtLgogIyBZb3UgcmFyZWx5IG5lZWQgdG8gcmVkZWZpbmUgYW55IG9mIHRoZXNlIGV4Y2Vw dCBXUktTUkMgYW5kIE5PX1dSS1NVQkRJUi4KICMKQEAgLTQyNTMsOSArNDI1NywxNyBAQAogLmVs c2UKIF9DSFJPT1RfU0VRPQogLmVuZGlmCisuaWYgZGVmaW5lZChMQVRFX0NPTkZMSUNUUykKK19F QVJMWV9DT05GTElDVF9DSEVDSz0KK19MQVRFX0NPTkZMSUNUX0NIRUNLPQljaGVjay1jb25mbGlj dHMKKy5lbHNlCitfRUFSTFlfQ09ORkxJQ1RfQ0hFQ0s9CWNoZWNrLWNvbmZsaWN0cworX0xBVEVf Q09ORkxJQ1RfQ0hFQ0s9CisuZW5kaWYKKwogX1NBTklUWV9TRVE9CSR7X0NIUk9PVF9TRVF9IHBy ZS1ldmVyeXRoaW5nIGNoZWNrLW1ha2VmaWxlIFwKIAkJCQljaGVjay1jYXRlZ29yaWVzIGNoZWNr LW1ha2V2YXJzIGNoZWNrLWRlc2t0b3AtZW50cmllcyBcCi0JCQkJY2hlY2stY29uZmxpY3RzIGNo ZWNrLWRlcGVuZHMgY2hlY2stZGVwcmVjYXRlZCBcCisJCQkJJHtfRUFSTFlfQ09ORkxJQ1RfQ0hF Q0t9IGNoZWNrLWRlcGVuZHMgY2hlY2stZGVwcmVjYXRlZCBcCiAJCQkJY2hlY2stdnVsbmVyYWJs ZSBidWlsZGFueXdheS1tZXNzYWdlIG9wdGlvbnMtbWVzc2FnZQogX0ZFVENIX0RFUD0JCWNoZWNr LXNhbml0eQogX0ZFVENIX1NFUT0JCWZldGNoLWRlcGVuZHMgcHJlLWZldGNoIHByZS1mZXRjaC1z Y3JpcHQgXApAQCAtNDI3NSw4ICs0Mjg3LDggQEAKIF9CVUlMRF9TRVE9CQlidWlsZC1tZXNzYWdl IHByZS1idWlsZCBwcmUtYnVpbGQtc2NyaXB0IGRvLWJ1aWxkIFwKIAkJCQlwb3N0LWJ1aWxkIHBv c3QtYnVpbGQtc2NyaXB0CiBfSU5TVEFMTF9ERVA9CWJ1aWxkCi1fSU5TVEFMTF9TRVE9CWluc3Rh bGwtbWVzc2FnZSBydW4tZGVwZW5kcyBsaWItZGVwZW5kcyBhcHBseS1zbGlzdCBwcmUtaW5zdGFs bCBcCi0JCQkJcHJlLWluc3RhbGwtc2NyaXB0IGdlbmVyYXRlLXBsaXN0IGNoZWNrLWFscmVhZHkt aW5zdGFsbGVkCitfSU5TVEFMTF9TRVE9CWluc3RhbGwtbWVzc2FnZSAke19MQVRFX0NPTkZMSUNU X0NIRUNLfSBydW4tZGVwZW5kcyBsaWItZGVwZW5kcyBcCisJCQkJYXBwbHktc2xpc3QgcHJlLWlu c3RhbGwgcHJlLWluc3RhbGwtc2NyaXB0IGdlbmVyYXRlLXBsaXN0IGNoZWNrLWFscmVhZHktaW5z dGFsbGVkCiBfSU5TVEFMTF9TVVNFUT0gY2hlY2stdW1hc2sgaW5zdGFsbC1tdHJlZSBwcmUtc3Ut aW5zdGFsbCBcCiAJCQkJcHJlLXN1LWluc3RhbGwtc2NyaXB0IGNyZWF0ZS11c2Vycy1ncm91cHMg ZG8taW5zdGFsbCBcCiAJCQkJaW5zdGFsbC1kZXNrdG9wLWVudHJpZXMgcG9zdC1pbnN0YWxsIHBv c3QtaW5zdGFsbC1zY3JpcHQgXAo= --0016e6d78475193ac7047d5e13c8--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?d873d5be1001170741r43207e0ehbabb3c511c230f5b>