Recent bsd.port.mk changes

[Alexander Leidinger]

On 18 Apr 2003 02:14:44 -0400
Joe Marcus Clarke <marcus at marcuscom.com> wrote:

> > The major benefit of this change is that it prevents people from
> > installing one copy of the port over an older version, thereby
> > screwing up their /var/db/pkg and possibly leaving orphan files lying
> > around.  I think that is important enough that it should stay in, in
> > some form.
> 
> Yes, I can see the advantage, but it now adds extra work (for me, maybe
> others).  The reason I Cc'd ports was to get an idea if others thought
> the same way I did.

I do the same (it makes sure the port is PREFIX safe and it makes it
easy to check if the plist is correct).

> > In your case since the PREFIX is different they don't actually
> > conflict so one might argue that it should be allowed.  I suppose
> > that's something that could be checked in bsd.port.mk by extracting
> > the prefix for the existing package from the contents file and
> > comparing to PREFIX.
> 
> This would be acceptable.  However, the make deinstall would still
> remove both versions.  What about keeping make deinstall the same as it
> was with one exception: if you type make deinstall in a port directory,
> and the version specified by that port's Makefile is not installed (but
> another version with the same origin is), then the other version would
> be deinstalled.  However, if a package is found that matches the version
> specified in the port's Makefile, then only that version is removed.  We
> could then add a make deinstall-all target to handle deinstalling all
> packages with the same origin.  Something like what's attached.

I like this idea.

Bye,
Alexander.

-- 
                  Weird enough for government work.

http://www.Leidinger.net                       Alexander @ Leidinger.net
  GPG fingerprint = C518 BC70 E67F 143F BE91  3365 79E2 9C60 B006 3FE7