pkg and packages

[Chris H]

On Wed, 03 May 2017 08:03:36 -0400 <scratch65535 at 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