tech-pkg archive
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Old Index]
Re: CONFLICTS variable is terrible
>> I personally think that missed CONFLICTS is critical bug and
>> most of them MUST be fixed before 2008Q4 happens.
>>
>> What's your plans?
>> For this one day noone even tried to use/test wip/pkg_conflicts.
> I have no plan. I don't konw why you want to fix it even though you
> want to remove the variable.
Because I don't believe this variable will be removed in nearest
future. Some of you think that DEPENDS are CONFLICTS are similar and
my proposal is stupidity.
I my view, CONFLICTS is completely different from DEPENDS.
Also "fixing" is not just adding new conflicts to the package.
Many packages should be fixed in a different way.
For example, lang/{js,spidermonkey,ossp-js}. See my previous email.
I think my original mail lists them all.
>> >> 2) I wrote wip/pkg_conflicts to automate checks for CONFLICTS.
>>
>>> It's nice, but seems some redundant.
>>> For example, ap13-* v.s. ap22-*.
>> I think wip/pkg_conflicts works correctly here.
>> hint: In your case apache-1.3 and apache-2.2 do not conflict.
> apache-1.3 and apache-2.2 are same package with diffrent version,
> naturally conflict, no need to mark as CONFLICTS.
Ok. I already said wip/pkg_conflicts doesn't understand indirect
conflicts yet.
>> >> 3) Why not to remove CONFLICTS variable at all?
>>
>>> How to detect CONFLISTS before installation from source?
>> Filenames from currently installed package (before unpacking) should be
>> checked
>> against filenames stored in database.
> It's binary package behaviour.
> Again, "Install from source".
"Install from source" should be implemented as "Create binary package"
and then "Install binary". This is why DESTDIR appeared. And this is
pkgsrc's long-term goal. Right? Anyway do not create new unnecessary
entities. Package installation should be implemented in ONE way,
one way for binary package and 'make install'. Sooner or later.
>>> And how about conflicts with older version, already resolved with
>>> current version?
Yet another reason why CONFLICTS should be removed in the future.
--
Best regards, Aleksey Cheusov.
Home |
Main Index |
Thread Index |
Old Index