On Wed, 03 May 2017 08:03:36 -0400 <scratch65...@att.net> wrote > After doing a general pkg upgrade on my server-of-all-work, I > discovered after some research that the Big Grey Background I was > left with was due to pkg having deleted, but not replaced, xfce4 > desktop. > > Trying to install the desktop package, I discovered that it's > bundled with at least 2 unrelated pieces of software: Thunar, > and samba44. That bothered me, but I needed the desktop. > > pkg got totally confused during the install, first downloading 44 > and THEN noticing the conflict with 46. So it downloaded 46, > too(!), deleted the existing 46, installed 44, and then tried to > re-install 46, failing with a complaint because it had just > installed 44 and that created a conflict. > > But it gets better. Trying to reinstall the samba46 package, I > discovered that I'd have to sacrifice the desktop that I just > installed. > > Clearly, no good can come of packaging unrelated software > together, so there needs to be a way to prevent that, or at least > criticise those who do it. > > And pkg should (a) check for later versions *before* downloading > older ones, (b) preferably not install old versions over newer > without explicit permission, and (c) as a fallback should allow > packages to be decomposed at install time such that installation > is not a yes/no all-or-nothing choice.
In pkg(8)'s humble defense; it simply *expedites* your request. It isn't the QA dept. for [port] Maintainers. Mind you; I *fully* appreciate your position. I'm simply trying to indicate *where*, or at *whom* to point fingers. :-) --Chris _______________________________________________ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
