On Thu, Jul 22, 2010 at 09:35:30AM +0100, Matthew Seaman wrote:
>
> On 21/07/2010 23:05, Mark Linimon wrote:
> > On Wed, Jul 21, 2010 at 10:21:11PM +0200, Kurt Jaeger wrote:
> >>> And is this ok to have two ports with the same name.
> >>
> >> No, it's bad and should be avoided. I'm pretty sure som
On 21/07/2010 23:05, Mark Linimon wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 21, 2010 at 10:21:11PM +0200, Kurt Jaeger wrote:
>>> And is this ok to have two ports with the same name.
>>
>> No, it's bad and should be avoided. I'm pretty sure some
>> portupgrade tool will break.
>
> No, they actually handle it ok. It _i
Mark Linimon writes:
> On Thu, Jul 22, 2010 at 02:18:36AM +0400, Anonymous wrote:
>> Ah, it uses NO_LATEST_LINK. So the answer is `none'. Sorry.
>
> Yeah, but I had to look it up myself.
>
> Do you know of any other examples that are missing either CONFLICTS or
> NO_LATEST_LINK?
>
I'm not sure w
On Thu, Jul 22, 2010 at 02:18:36AM +0400, Anonymous wrote:
> Ah, it uses NO_LATEST_LINK. So the answer is `none'. Sorry.
Yeah, but I had to look it up myself.
Do you know of any other examples that are missing either CONFLICTS or
NO_LATEST_LINK?
mcl
__
Anonymous writes:
> Mark Linimon writes:
>
>> On Wed, Jul 21, 2010 at 10:21:11PM +0200, Kurt Jaeger wrote:
>>> > And is this ok to have two ports with the same name.
>>>
>>> No, it's bad and should be avoided. I'm pretty sure some
>>> portupgrade tool will break.
>>
>> No, they actually handle
Mark Linimon writes:
> On Wed, Jul 21, 2010 at 10:21:11PM +0200, Kurt Jaeger wrote:
>> > And is this ok to have two ports with the same name.
>>
>> No, it's bad and should be avoided. I'm pretty sure some
>> portupgrade tool will break.
>
> No, they actually handle it ok. It _is_ confusing to t
On Wed, Jul 21, 2010 at 10:21:11PM +0200, Kurt Jaeger wrote:
> > And is this ok to have two ports with the same name.
>
> No, it's bad and should be avoided. I'm pretty sure some
> portupgrade tool will break.
No, they actually handle it ok. It _is_ confusing to the users, however
(and, if you g
> 21.07.2010 20:47, Ashish SHUKLA ??:
> > In case of multiple ports installing files with same name at same path, then
> > one of them needs to alter the file names by using suffix or prefix, like
> > GNU
> > projects do when they collide with BSD equivalents by using 'g' as prefix.
>
> I
Ruslan Mahmatkhanov writes:
> 21.07.2010 20:47, Ashish SHUKLA пишет:
>> In case of multiple ports installing files with same name at same path, then
>> one of them needs to alter the file names by using suffix or prefix, like GNU
>> projects do when they collide with BSD equivalents by using 'g' as
21.07.2010 20:47, Ashish SHUKLA пишет:
In case of multiple ports installing files with same name at same path, then
one of them needs to alter the file names by using suffix or prefix, like GNU
projects do when they collide with BSD equivalents by using 'g' as prefix.
I don't think that prefixi
cvs-src writes:
>Good day!
>We now have two ports with name 'hydra' in the tree, one in security
>category, and one in www.
>Both installs file ${PREFIX}/bin/hydra.
>I firstly think about asking for add CONFLICTS line, but then come up
>to ports tree should not have
>t
Good day!
We now have two ports with name 'hydra' in the tree, one in security
category, and one in www.
Both installs file ${PREFIX}/bin/hydra.
I firstly think about asking for add CONFLICTS line, but then come up
to ports tree should not have
two ports with same name.
Wha
12 matches
Mail list logo
