On Tue, 9 Mar 2010 11:01:24 -0800 Charlie Kester <corky1...@comcast.net> wrote:
> On Tue 09 Mar 2010 at 10:25:14 PST Gary Jennejohn wrote: > >On Tue, 9 Mar 2010 10:23:51 -0500 > >Steven Kreuzer <skreu...@freebsd.org> wrote: > > > >> Hello- > >> > >> As documented in http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=ports/144277 > >> we have two ports with the same name: > >> > >> Port: gag-2.9 > >> Path: /usr/ports/security/gag > >> Info: A stacheldraht (DOS attack) agent detector > >> Maint: po...@freebsd.org > >> B-deps: > >> R-deps: > >> WWW: http://www.washington.edu/People/dad/ > >> > >> Port: gag-4.9 > >> Path: /usr/ports/sysutils/gag > >> Info: Graphical Boot Manager > >> Maint: alepul...@freebsd.org > >> B-deps: > >> R-deps: > >> WWW: http://gag.sourceforge.net/ > >> > >> I am looking for some advice on whats the best course of action to deal > >> with this. > >> > >> My gut feeling is that sysutils/gag should remain the same and that > >> security/gag should be > >> renamed to security/gag-stacheldraht. > >> > >> Anyone vehemently opposed to this? > >> > > > >So where's the problem? sysutils/gag doesn't seem to install a binary > >which would conflict with security/gag. In fact, it doesn't seem to > >install an executable at all, based on examining the Makefile and > >pkg-plist. > > Could be a problem for tools like portmaster that allow the user to > specify the port name only, rather than category/portname. > > If a user has both gags installed and then runs "portmaster gag", how > should portmaster resolve the ambiguity? > By examining the ORIGIN tags in +CONTENTS and asking the user which one to update? IMO this is a putative problem which shouldn't be "fixed" by renaming a port. But I'm just a lowly ports committer and not a member of portmgr. --- Gary Jennejohn _______________________________________________ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
