cvs commit: ports/emulators/linux_base-fc4 Makefile ports/emulators/linux_base-suse-9.1 Makefile ports/emulators/linux_base-suse-9.2 Makefile ports/emulators/linux_base-suse-9.3 Makefile ports/emulators/linux_dist-gentoo-stage1 Makefile ports/emu

[Boris Samorodov]

On Thu, 5 Oct 2006 14:14:29 -0400 Kris Kennaway wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 05, 2006 at 10:10:21PM +0400, Boris Samorodov wrote:
> > On Thu, 5 Oct 2006 13:40:20 -0400 Kris Kennaway wrote:
> > > On Thu, Oct 05, 2006 at 08:11:01PM +0400, Boris Samorodov wrote:
> > > > On Thu, 5 Oct 2006 19:49:53 +0400 Andrew Pantyukhin wrote:
> > > > > On 10/5/06, Boris Samorodov <bsam at freebsd.org> wrote:
> > > > > > bsam        2006-10-05 15:32:10 UTC
> > > > > >
> > > > > >   FreeBSD ports repository
> > > > > >
> > > > > >   Modified files:
> > > > > >     emulators/linux_base-fc4 Makefile
> > > > > >     emulators/linux_base-suse-9.1 Makefile
> > > > > >     emulators/linux_base-suse-9.2 Makefile
> > > > > >     emulators/linux_base-suse-9.3 Makefile
> > > > > >     emulators/linux_dist-gentoo-stage1 Makefile
> > > > > >     emulators/linux_dist-gentoo-stage2 Makefile
> > > > > >     emulators/linux_dist-gentoo-stage3 Makefile
> > > > > >     x11/linux-XFree86-libs Makefile
> > > > > >   Log:
> > > > > >   Remove deleted linux_base-* and linux_locale* ports from CONFLICTS variable
> > > > > >   of the remaining linux ports.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >   Reviewed by:    netchild (agreed in principle)
> > > > 
> > > > > IMHO, you really shouldn't do that. People with old packages
> > > > > installed should not worry about trying out new ports. Now you've
> > > > > opened a way for their systems to be messed up.
> > > > 
> > > > Well, we are speaking about already deleted ports. Once they were
> > > > deleted and user's ports tree updated any adding/removing should be
> > > > done according to /usr/ports/UPDATING (i.e. reading about default
> > > > linux_base port and how to upgrade).
> > > > 
> > > > Once a user uses fixed ports tree and pre-built packages there should
> > > > be no problems.
> > 
> > > I agree with Andrew; there should at least be a window where you keep
> > > the CONFLICTS around to give users time to upgrade without installing
> > > conflicting packages that mess up their system.
> > 
> > OK, you convinced me. How long should this period be?

> At least a month, probably.

Got it, thanks.


WBR
-- 
bsam