On Fri, 2005-01-07 at 08:43 +0100, Michael van Elst wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 06, 2005 at 05:08:24PM -0800, David M. Fetter wrote:
>
> > FATAL: errors occured while building:
> > postgresql-7.4.3-2.1.0: postgresql has conflicting requirement
>
> That is a message from the build tool.
>
> > After tracing this error out, I found that it is because openpkg build
> > seems to find that tcl is installed, however it doesn't seem to realize
> > that the installed tcl isn't built with the with_x11 option
>
> It does find out but doesn't know how to proceed. There should be
> a line in the generated output like
>
> # ... has conflicting requirement option = value != new-value
>
> most likely pointing to the tcl package.
>
> The logic in depend_option() checks a dependency against an already
> installed package. If you want "tcl::with_x11=yes" and have installed
> "tcl::with_x11=no" then it is seen as a conflict.
>
> I don't know remember exactly why this is tested this way. The
> test is performed only for dependent packages and not for anything
> you ask to be built on the command line.
>
> Changing line 1599ff from
>
> $relmap = $env->{built}->{$pro->{prefix}} ||
> $env->{installed}->{$pro->{prefix}};
>
> to
>
> $relmap = $env->{built}->{$pro->{prefix}};
>
> in depend_option() restricts the test to packages in the build list
> (which is definitely necessary). But I don't see yet the implications
> of this change.
>
> You should also be able to overcome the conflict by asking for an
> upgrade of '-Dtcl::with_x11 -Dpostgresql::with_tcl tcl postgresql'.
>
> This way the update to 'tcl' is performed first, therefore it
> appears in the build list with the new option and the test against
> the requirements of postgresql succeeds.Ok, so what you're saying basically concurs with my theory of what is going on. The problem though, is that we need to automate the updates, it would be entirely too encumbersome to manually update servers everytime such a conflict occurs. I'm sure you understand the dilemmas. Thus the -D...-D options aren't really optimal for such automation. How do you suggest this be resolved? > > > Greetings, -- David M. Fetter - UNIX Systems Administrator Portland State University - www.oit.pdx.edu
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
