On Sat, 16 Jan 2010 21:26:28 +0100 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...
I'd be very happy if I could:
- fetch the distfiles, even if I have a conflicting port installed
- be able to use portmaster -o to switch from one port to an other one
that conflicts with it.
- be able to at least compile a port (eg. for testing) without having
to de-install the current one.
I'm all in favor of restoring the old behavior with a switch available
to turn on the new one.
--
IOnut - Un^d^dregistered ;) FreeBSD "user"
"Intellectual Property" is nowhere near as valuable as "Intellect"
FreeBSD committer -> ite...@freebsd.org, PGP Key ID 057E9F8B493A297B
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
