On Thu, Jan 16, 2014 at 8:41 AM, CeDeROM <cede...@tlen.pl> wrote: > Hello and thank you for all suggestions :-) > > What I mean is that PKG seems to be missing some "good" mechanism for > such conflict solution... and this situation WILL happen as users will > want to rebuild custom options of packages from a different port tree. > > I have compiled by hand hpijs with network backend as my HP use > JetDirect and this is disabled by default. Because I have compiled a > port with WITH_PKGNG I assumed that PKG will be engaged and take care > of proper dependency management or refuse to install as this would > break binary dependencies tree. I was wrong. > > I also assumed that PKG will manage to handle port renames, dependency > changes, etc. I was wrong. > > +1 for PKG to be able to handle such situations either by simply > forcing to set port tree to version that would allow safe build (bad > for new ports, simple solution), or calculate dependencies so they > won't break current binary tree when newer ports are installed (good > for new ports, complex work for pkg) :-) > > Long story short - there should be no conflict situation when I > install updated port build by hand :-) >
I believe a lot of that is planned for future releases, and that 1.3 goes a long way toward that goal (released Real Soon Now). However, I'm not directly involved in the development of pkg, so could be way off in my predictions. :) -- Freddie Cash fjwc...@gmail.com _______________________________________________ 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"