Date: Sun, 20 Apr 2003 18:55:32 +0400 From: "Sergey Matveychuk" <sem@ciam.ru> To: <ports@freebsd.org> Cc: kris@obsecurity.org Subject: Re: Recent bsd.port.mk changes Message-ID: <000501c3074c$e5c2be80$0a2da8c0@sem>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Joe Marcus Clarke wrote: > On Fri, 2003-04-18 at 00:57, Kris Kennaway wrote: > > In your case since the PREFIX is different they don't actually > > conflict so one might argue that it should be allowed. I suppose > > that's something that could be checked in bsd.port.mk by extracting > > the prefix for the existing package from the contents file and > > comparing to PREFIX. Disagree. This case really dangerous for users. What happened if you try install a port with other PREFIX than already installed port with the same version? You'll lose port information in PKG_DBDIR. And when you'll deinstall new installed port you'll have got orphan files. That is user must understand the dangerous and use FORCE_PKG_REGISTER=yes for his responsibility. > This would be acceptable. However, the make deinstall would still > remove both versions. What about keeping make deinstall the same as it > was with one exception: if you type make deinstall in a port directory, > and the version specified by that port's Makefile is not installed (but > another version with the same origin is), then the other version would > be deinstalled. However, if a package is found that matches the version > specified in the port's Makefile, then only that version is removed. We Sounds good. > could then add a make deinstall-all target to handle deinstalling all > packages with the same origin. Something like what's attached. Kris, what do you think about this new target? I don't see necessity of it. I'd like to test this patch properly. ---- Sem.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?000501c3074c$e5c2be80$0a2da8c0>