On 1/16/10, Pav Lucistnik <p...@freebsd.org> wrote:
> Greg Larkin píše v so 16. 01. 2010 v 13:58 -0500:
>
>> That's exactly what I proposed. The bsd.port.mk could be patched to
>> support a new variable ("EARLY_CONFLICT_CHECK=yes" or somesuch) that
>> shifts the check-conflict target from its old position (part of the
>> install sequence) to its new position (fetch?).
>>
>> The default behavior (no mods to /etc/make.conf) would revert to the old
>> conflict checking method. This may be something for portmgr@ to chime
>> in on, and I'm cc'ing them now. There could be other reasons for this
>> change that I'm unaware of.
>
> What is the particular scenario that the new conflicts handling broke
> for you? Often you really want to ignore locally installed packages and
> then it's better to override LOCALBASE to /nonex or something similar,
> instead of disabling conflict handling...
Some people want to be able to fetch and build ports that conflict
with installed ports, without going to the trouble of (1)
re-installing all of the build dependencies in an alternate LOCALBASE;
or (2) first de-installing, and then afterwards reinstalling the
conflicting ports. And they want to do this without disabling the
conflict check, so that they don't mistakenly corrupt an installed
port.
b.
_______________________________________________
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
