ports/172600: [PKGNG]sysutils/bacula-client & sysutils/bacula-server conflict and shouldn't

[Ruslan Makhmatkhanov]

Dan Langille wrote on 03.01.2013 20:37:
> On 2013-01-03 11:10, Ruslan Makhmatkhanov wrote:
>> Thank you for quick reply!
>>
>> Larry Rosenman wrote on 03.01.2013 19:52:
>>> ===>   Running ldconfig
>>> /sbin/ldconfig -m /usr/local/lib
>>> ===>   Registering installation for bacula-client-5.2.12
>>> Installing bacula-client-5.2.12...pkg: bacula-client-5.2.12 conflicts
>>> with bacula-server-5.2.12 (installs files into the same place).
>>> Problematic file: /usr/local/man/man8/bacula-fd.8.gz
>>
>> It's quite odd, because this file is installed only if
>> WITH_CLIENT_ONLY is enabled. Can't it be some pkg cached result or
>> something? Would you please try to set PORTREVISION to 1 in
>> bacula-server/Makefile and try again? If this helps,
>
> Larry: FYI: bacula-server now installs bacula-client as a LIB_DEPENDS
>
> Thus, after installing bacula-server, bacula-client should already be
> installed.
>
> Does that help?

Maybe they need to be deinstalled first?

> Ahh, yes, we did not bump the PORTREVISION.  I think we should have. Let
> me know
> if a bump helps.
>
>>> Yes, it still seems to be broken,  there is a pending PR to fix it, but
>>> AFAIK it has NOT been committed yet.
>>
>> This one, that I closed today?
>> http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=170773
>
> No, this PR committed in Dec:
>
> http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=ports/167700
>
>> I believe it's no more applicable to current port state and something
>> similar is done in current bacula ports anyway.
>
> I do not understand the above statement.

Forget it :). I mean something like "this particular patch (from pr I 
mentioned) will not apply against current ports tree". And the second 
part - the current bacula ports should be ok by themselves, and no 
modification like in that pr is needed anymore. But it's strange that it 
still failing with pkgng.

-- 
Regards,
Ruslan

Tinderboxing kills... the drives.