Date: Tue, 29 May 2001 12:31:29 +0200 (CEST) From: Espen Skoglund <esk@ira.uka.de> To: freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Maintainer note: Please commit ports/27453 Message-ID: <15123.31361.988389.672402@i30nb2.ira.uka.de> In-Reply-To: <15122.34649.427846.394028@i30nb2.ira.uka.de> References: <15122.34649.427846.394028@i30nb2.ira.uka.de>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
[Espen Skoglund] > The following PR fixes an mtree problem with devel/arm-elf-gcc295: > > http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=ports/27453 Uhm, wait a minute, it seems that the file added to the plist (bin/arm-elf-c++filt) was also part of arm-elf-binutils. What should one do when there are conflicts like this? Should I: a) Ignore the file in the gcc plist. This will somehow work since gcc depends on binutils anyway. It will create errorlogs on bento, though, and it seems like the wrong thing to do since it will possibly leave you with files in the system which are unaccounted for. b) Add it to the gcc plist, remove it from the binutils plist, and manually remove the file from the file system after make install in arm-elf-binutils. Since arm-elf-gcc295 is probably the only port which will ever need this file, this seems like a working solution. It does, however, create a few problems if you reinstall binutils after gcc has been installed (i.e., file will be deleted). c) Have the file in both plists. Easiest solution. Will ``break'' binutils if gcc is removed from the system. If gcc is removed on the other hand, there is probably no other port using binutils anyway. Comments? eSk To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-ports" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?15123.31361.988389.672402>