Second "RFC" on pkg-data idea for ports

[Kris Kennaway]

On Tue, Apr 13, 2004 at 12:23:31PM +0800, Erich Dollansky wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> Garance A Drosihn wrote:
> >At 11:40 PM -0400 4/12/04, Garance A Drosihn wrote:
> >
> >>What I'd like is some idea of whether this project is worth
> >>pursuing.  If not, then Darren and I will concentrate on some
> >>other, less disruptive project....
> >>
> >>If this project does not seem like it would be worth the effort,
> >>then that will be perfectly okay too.  Please let me know what
> >>you think...
> >
> >
> >Note that I am expecting that "silence" means the project is
> >NOT worth doing.  I can not commit these changes without help
> 
> I would not express it like this. The problems people have with FreeBSD 
> are very different one.
> 
> Let me explain the very simple problem I alway encounter while working 
> with the ports as a plain user.
> 
> If some other versions of related packages or ports are installed, the 
> installation process does not complete or even stops just at the spot.
> 
> It would be real helpfull to users if the package or port system would 
> be able to automatically overcome this problem with installing the 
> needed version in a way that the installed versions stays intact.

Take a look at the portupgrade port, I think that's what you're trying
to describe.

> This could lead to a general system where any number of different 
> versions of a package or port could be installed on the machine without 
> any interferance.

That's a very different problem.

Kris
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 187 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-ports/attachments/20040412/62090f53/attachment.bin