CONFLICTS usage question

[Oliver Eikemeier]

Am Freitag den, 18. Juni 2004, um 22:30, schrieb Thomas-Martin Seck:

> * Oliver Eikemeier (eikemeier at fillmore-labs.com):
>
>> Thomas-Martin Seck wrote:
>
> [port (deliberately) CONFLICTS with itself]

??? Of course bugs like that won't hinder a port to install.

>>>> No. You will break installation with FORCE_PKG_REGISTER=yes.
>>>
>>> What about "-DFORCE_PKG_REGISTER -DDISABLE_CONFLICTS"?
>>
>> This disables the checks for already installed packages *and*
>> for conflicting packages, which are disjoint sets. You can
>> use this to repair files overwritten by a conflicting port
>> (of course damaging the other port in the process).
>
> Maybe, but one /can/ forcibly reinstall a self-conflicting port with
> FORCE_PKG_REGISTER and DISABLE_CONFLICTS if one is determined to do so.

Yep. You won't notice when you damage other ports, (which you will
when you do not use DISABLE_CONFLICTS), but you can do it that way.

Anyway, read bsd.port.mk if you want to see other uses of 
FORCE_PKG_REGISTER
and why conflicting with itself is a relly bad idea. CONFLICTS and
FORCE_PKG_REGISTER deal with different topics.

> As an interesting side note: it is amazing how many ports install a
> ${PREFIX}/etc/leapsecs.dat. Where are CONFLICTS when you need them :(

Which ports are you referring to?

-Oliver