From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Jan 17 00:08:32 2010 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 842C0106566C for ; Sun, 17 Jan 2010 00:08:32 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from kirk@strauser.com) Received: from kanga.honeypot.net (kanga.honeypot.net [IPv6:2001:470:a80a:1:21f:d0ff:fe22:b8a8]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 42A138FC0C for ; Sun, 17 Jan 2010 00:08:32 +0000 (UTC) Received: from kanga.honeypot.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by kanga.honeypot.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 585C8340B8 for ; Sat, 16 Jan 2010 18:08:31 -0600 (CST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at honeypot.net Received: from kanga.honeypot.net ([127.0.0.1]) by kanga.honeypot.net (kanga.honeypot.net [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id gxmXTaKtyt1R for ; Sat, 16 Jan 2010 18:08:28 -0600 (CST) Received: from [10.0.7.105] (wlan2-105.honeypot.net [10.0.7.105]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-CAMELLIA256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by kanga.honeypot.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id A7900340B3 for ; Sat, 16 Jan 2010 18:08:28 -0600 (CST) Message-ID: <4B5254FE.1000907@strauser.com> Date: Sat, 16 Jan 2010 18:08:30 -0600 From: Kirk Strauser User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.9.1.7pre) Gecko/20091214 Shredder/3.0.1pre MIME-Version: 1.0 To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org References: <4B520C71.9080301@FreeBSD.org> <1263673588.1541.60.camel@hood.oook.cz> In-Reply-To: <1263673588.1541.60.camel@hood.oook.cz> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-2; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: Dislike the way port conflicts are handled now X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 17 Jan 2010 00:08:32 -0000 On 01/16/2010 02:26 PM, Pav Lucistnik wrote: > What is the particular scenario that the new conflicts handling broke > for you? Often you really want to ignore locally installed packages and > then it's better to override LOCALBASE to /nonex or something similar, > instead of disabling conflict handling.. Pav, I'm the OP, and described the problem in the first post. To recap, though, say I want to upgrade from the databases/mysql50-client port to databases/mysql51-client. Without taking extra steps such as using -DDISABLE_CONFLICTS or removing the CONFLICTS definition from the Makefile, I can't even start downloading the distfiles (using "make fetch") until I pkg_delete the old version. With the old system, I could do everything up through building the new port so that the time between running pkg_delete and "make reinstall" is minimized. -- Kirk Strauser