Date: Thu, 16 Jan 2014 17:41:25 +0100 From: CeDeROM <cederom@tlen.pl> To: Freddie Cash <fjwcash@gmail.com> Cc: FreeBSD Stable <freebsd-stable@freebsd.org>, freebsd-ports <freebsd-ports@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: FreeBSD 10.0-RC4 pkg upgrade QT conflict Message-ID: <CAFYkXj=oYH7hytnnF35mU9ud0sB-YtEqyTNY5j97xN8cA5Vrug@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <CAOjFWZ6ezb9zLRzFJ82bZ3pC5Respg=jA04N2PhKTPa%2B2f5c6g@mail.gmail.com> References: <CAFYkXjm5jyxd=MWJ=874NCzkv6KpjdaTv1DMYN_v0XTyRhJ8rw@mail.gmail.com> <CAFYkXjn-4KjALHfQUKO=NnksiaxkGYSNW3XmNareZ05veg78cw@mail.gmail.com> <CAOjFWZ6ezb9zLRzFJ82bZ3pC5Respg=jA04N2PhKTPa%2B2f5c6g@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Hello and thank you for all suggestions :-) What I mean is that PKG seems to be missing some "good" mechanism for such conflict solution... and this situation WILL happen as users will want to rebuild custom options of packages from a different port tree. I have compiled by hand hpijs with network backend as my HP use JetDirect and this is disabled by default. Because I have compiled a port with WITH_PKGNG I assumed that PKG will be engaged and take care of proper dependency management or refuse to install as this would break binary dependencies tree. I was wrong. I also assumed that PKG will manage to handle port renames, dependency changes, etc. I was wrong. +1 for PKG to be able to handle such situations either by simply forcing to set port tree to version that would allow safe build (bad for new ports, simple solution), or calculate dependencies so they won't break current binary tree when newer ports are installed (good for new ports, complex work for pkg) :-) Long story short - there should be no conflict situation when I install updated port build by hand :-) Best regards :-) Tomek -- CeDeROM, SQ7MHZ, http://www.tomek.cedro.info
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CAFYkXj=oYH7hytnnF35mU9ud0sB-YtEqyTNY5j97xN8cA5Vrug>