On Mon, 4 Feb 2002, Alistair Crooks wrote:

> Sure, but we're talking about pkgsrc here, which is not one of
> those things that requires case-preserving-but-ignoring attributes,
> and, in fact, has harmful side-effects.
>
> I really don't see any way around specifying UFS as a pre-requisite,
> but am certainly open to suggestions.

For now, requiring UFS sounds fine.

In the long run though, I think it would be best if we could move to not
needing it. Because most MacOS X installs won't have it. Most installs
will be single-filesystem ones, and that fs will be hfs+. So requiring UFS
will limit pkgsrc's usabilit much more so than on other OSs. :-(

How many places in _our_ part of pkgsrc do we have case conflicts? CVS/cvs
comes to mind. Any others?

I realize there are going to be other problems with packages that
internally won't work because of case problems, but those packages won't
work on MacOS X anyway. The authors will have to change things to make
them work. So while I think we could help this, we don't have to do it all
ourselves. :-)

Maybe a thing to migrate to would be a package flag that says it needs a
case-sensitive fs, and a flag that says we have (or don't have) one. That
way I could for instance say I want only case insensitive packages (and
have it work on hfs), and you could say you want all packages (and have it
require ufs).

Take care,

Bill