It was pointed out to me by adamw@ that the samba-devel installes a libsmbclient.so, so it needs a conflicts line now. And add a conflics line to the samba port just to make it complete. The samba and libsmbclient port can live together.
Responsible Changed From-To: freebsd-ports-bugs->dwcjr Hand over to the maintainer of most of the ports this PR updates :)
Looks good to me, I approve of the samba port changes.
The patch in this PR has already been approved by dwcjr and portmgr. However, I just noticed that the japanese/samba port ought to be listed because it conflicts with the three ports that were originally covered by the PR. Here's the modified patch set for review by nakaji and again by dwcjr and portmgr: Index: japanese/samba/Makefile =================================================================== RCS file: /home/ncvs/ports/japanese/samba/Makefile,v retrieving revision 1.38 diff -u -r1.38 Makefile --- japanese/samba/Makefile 23 Oct 2003 15:11:43 -0000 1.38 +++ japanese/samba/Makefile 24 Nov 2003 18:38:57 -0000 @@ -20,6 +20,8 @@ MAINTAINER= nakaji@jp.FreeBSD.org COMMENT= A free SMB and CIFS client and server for UNIX +CONFLICTS= samba-3* samba-libsmbclient-3* + SAMBA_VERSION= 2.2.8a SAMBA_JA_VERSION= 1.1 Index: net/samba/Makefile =================================================================== RCS file: /home/ncvs/ports/net/samba/Makefile,v retrieving revision 1.127 diff -u -r1.127 Makefile --- net/samba/Makefile 8 Nov 2003 20:12:12 -0000 1.127 +++ net/samba/Makefile 24 Nov 2003 18:39:56 -0000 @@ -25,6 +25,8 @@ MAINTAINER= dwcjr@FreeBSD.org COMMENT= A free SMB and CIFS client and server for UNIX +CONFLICTS= samba-3* ja-samba* + USE_BZIP2= YES USE_SUBMAKE= YES USE_GMAKE= YES Index: net/samba-devel/Makefile =================================================================== RCS file: /home/ncvs/ports/net/samba-devel/Makefile,v retrieving revision 1.96 diff -u -r1.96 Makefile --- net/samba-devel/Makefile 10 Oct 2003 21:24:14 -0000 1.96 +++ net/samba-devel/Makefile 24 Nov 2003 18:39:31 -0000 @@ -16,6 +16,8 @@ MAINTAINER= dwcjr@FreeBSD.org COMMENT= A free SMB and CIFS client and server for UNIX +CONFLICTS= samba-* ja-samba-* + USE_BZIP2="YES" .if !defined(WITHOUT_CUPS) Index: net/samba-libsmbclient/Makefile =================================================================== RCS file: /home/ncvs/ports/net/samba-libsmbclient/Makefile,v retrieving revision 1.6 diff -u -r1.6 Makefile --- net/samba-libsmbclient/Makefile 30 Sep 2003 19:22:38 -0000 1.6 +++ net/samba-libsmbclient/Makefile 24 Nov 2003 18:39:41 -0000 @@ -18,6 +18,8 @@ MAINTAINER= einekoai@chello.nl COMMENT= The shared lib from the samba packges +CONFLICTS= samba-3* ja-samba* + USE_BZIP2= yes USE_AUTOCONF= yes WANT_AUTOCONF_VER= 253 -- Trevor Johnson
Oliver Eikemeier wrote: > CONFLICTS= samba-* > > is bad, the port will conflict with itself. Use something like: The CONFLICTS lines for the linux_base ports have looked like this for awhile, and they work fine for me. Moreover I haven't seen any complaints about them. > Port ja-samba-2.2.8a.j1.1_3 (japanese/samba) <nakaji@jp.FreeBSD.org>: > CONFLICTS= ja-linux-JM-* samba-2.2.* samba-3.0.* sharity-light-1.* I don't see how japanese/linux-JM conflicts. It installs an smbfs man page, but the other ports don't AFAICT. > Port samba-2.2.8a (net/samba) <dwcjr@FreeBSD.org>: > CONFLICTS= ja-samba-2.* samba-3.* sharity-light-1.* > > Port samba-3.0.0,1 (net/samba-devel) <dwcjr@FreeBSD.org>: > CONFLICTS= ja-samba-2.* samba-2.* samba-libsmbclient-3.* sharity-light-1.* > > Port samba-libsmbclient-3.0.0 (net/samba-libsmbclient) <einekoai@chello.nl>: > CONFLICTS= samba-3.* > > Port sharity-light-1.2_1 (net/sharity-light) <ports@FreeBSD.org>: > CONFLICTS= ja-samba-2.* samba-2.* samba-3.* I'd noticed japanese/samba but not net/sharity-light--good spotting! -- Trevor Johnson
Trevor Johnson wrote: > Oliver Eikemeier wrote: > >>CONFLICTS= samba-* >> >>is bad, the port will conflict with itself. Use something like: > > The CONFLICTS lines for the linux_base ports have looked like this for > awhile, and they work fine for me. Moreover I haven't seen any complaints > about them. CONFLICTS is very new, so complaints are rare. The bsd.port.mk target `check-already-installed' checks if a port is already installed, `check-conflicts' comes before that. You can reinstall a package with FORCE_PKG_REGISTER, but will fail because of conflicts checking in this case. It is unlikely that people will notice this during normal use, but it gives unexpected results in border cases. Don't do it, it's bad stlye. And if someone does a samba-doc port, you will conflict with it too. >>Port ja-samba-2.2.8a.j1.1_3 (japanese/samba) <nakaji@jp.FreeBSD.org>: >>CONFLICTS= ja-linux-JM-* samba-2.2.* samba-3.0.* sharity-light-1.* > > I don't see how japanese/linux-JM conflicts. It installs an smbfs man > page, but the other ports don't AFAICT. Both japanese/samba and japanese/linux-JM install man/ja/man8/smbmount.8.gz man/ja/man8/smbumount.8.gz (and remove it on deinstall). >>Port samba-2.2.8a (net/samba) <dwcjr@FreeBSD.org>: >>CONFLICTS= ja-samba-2.* samba-3.* sharity-light-1.* >> >>Port samba-3.0.0,1 (net/samba-devel) <dwcjr@FreeBSD.org>: >>CONFLICTS= ja-samba-2.* samba-2.* samba-libsmbclient-3.* sharity-light-1.* >> >>Port samba-libsmbclient-3.0.0 (net/samba-libsmbclient) <einekoai@chello.nl>: >>CONFLICTS= samba-3.* >> >>Port sharity-light-1.2_1 (net/sharity-light) <ports@FreeBSD.org>: >>CONFLICTS= ja-samba-2.* samba-2.* samba-3.* > > I'd noticed japanese/samba but not net/sharity-light--good spotting! portconflicts tool, still in alpha testing. I want to commit that soon...
Oliver Eikemeier wrote: > Trevor Johnson wrote: > > > Oliver Eikemeier wrote: > > > >>CONFLICTS= samba-* > >> > >>is bad, the port will conflict with itself. Use something like: > > > > The CONFLICTS lines for the linux_base ports have looked like this for > > awhile, and they work fine for me. Moreover I haven't seen any complaints > > about them. > CONFLICTS is very new, so complaints are rare. It's not all that new--those lines were added on July 3rd, before 4.9-RELEASE. > The bsd.port.mk target > `check-already-installed' checks if a port is already installed, > `check-conflicts' comes before that. You can reinstall a package with > FORCE_PKG_REGISTER, but will fail because of conflicts checking in this > case. It is unlikely that people will notice this during normal use, > but it gives unexpected results in border cases. Don't do it, it's bad > stlye. And if someone does a samba-doc port, you will conflict with it too. I don't see any problem when I do "make all install deinstall reinstall" (is this what you meant?) but if I do "make install" again afterward, it fails which IMHO is not bad. Anyway it isn't worth fighting about. > >>Port ja-samba-2.2.8a.j1.1_3 (japanese/samba) <nakaji@jp.FreeBSD.org>: > >>CONFLICTS= ja-linux-JM-* samba-2.2.* samba-3.0.* sharity-light-1.* > > > > I don't see how japanese/linux-JM conflicts. It installs an smbfs man > > page, but the other ports don't AFAICT. > Both japanese/samba and japanese/linux-JM install > man/ja/man8/smbmount.8.gz > man/ja/man8/smbumount.8.gz > (and remove it on deinstall). Oh, I am hoist by my own petard: it generates its own packing list, whereas I had only glanced at its port skeleton. It should have a CONFLICTS line too then: Index: Makefile =================================================================== RCS file: /home/ncvs/ports/japanese/linux-JM/Makefile,v retrieving revision 1.6 diff -u -r1.6 Makefile --- Makefile 7 Mar 2003 06:04:50 -0000 1.6 +++ Makefile 24 Nov 2003 20:10:04 -0000 @@ -14,6 +14,7 @@ MAINTAINER= sada@FreeBSD.org COMMENT= Japanese translated man pages by JM Project +CONFLICTS= ja-samba-2* samba-3* samba-devel-* DIST_SUBDIR= ${PORTNAME} MANSECS= 1 3 4 5 8 NO_MTREE= yes > >>Port samba-2.2.8a (net/samba) <dwcjr@FreeBSD.org>: > >>CONFLICTS= ja-samba-2.* samba-3.* sharity-light-1.* > >> > >>Port samba-3.0.0,1 (net/samba-devel) <dwcjr@FreeBSD.org>: > >>CONFLICTS= ja-samba-2.* samba-2.* samba-libsmbclient-3.* sharity-light-1.* > >> > >>Port samba-libsmbclient-3.0.0 (net/samba-libsmbclient) <einekoai@chello.nl>: > >>CONFLICTS= samba-3.* > >> > >>Port sharity-light-1.2_1 (net/sharity-light) <ports@FreeBSD.org>: > >>CONFLICTS= ja-samba-2.* samba-2.* samba-3.* > > > > I'd noticed japanese/samba but not net/sharity-light--good spotting! > > portconflicts tool, still in alpha testing. I want to commit that soon... -- Trevor Johnson
> >>Port samba-2.2.8a (net/samba) <dwcjr@FreeBSD.org>: > >>CONFLICTS= ja-samba-2.* samba-3.* sharity-light-1.* > >> > >>Port samba-3.0.0,1 (net/samba-devel) <dwcjr@FreeBSD.org>: > >>CONFLICTS= ja-samba-2.* samba-2.* samba-libsmbclient-3.* sharity-light-1.* The two above need to have "ja-linux-JM-*" added. > >>Port samba-libsmbclient-3.0.0 (net/samba-libsmbclient) <einekoai@chello.nl>: > >>CONFLICTS= samba-3.* > >> > >>Port sharity-light-1.2_1 (net/sharity-light) <ports@FreeBSD.org>: > >>CONFLICTS= ja-samba-2.* samba-2.* samba-3.* -- Trevor Johnson
Trevor Johnson wrote: >>>>Port samba-2.2.8a (net/samba) <dwcjr@FreeBSD.org>: >>>>CONFLICTS= ja-samba-2.* samba-3.* sharity-light-1.* >>>> >>>>Port samba-3.0.0,1 (net/samba-devel) <dwcjr@FreeBSD.org>: >>>>CONFLICTS= ja-samba-2.* samba-2.* samba-libsmbclient-3.* sharity-light-1.* > > The two above need to have "ja-linux-JM-*" added. Nope, they intall man/man8/smbmount.8.gz man/man8/smbumount.8.gz not man/ja/man8/smbmount.8.gz man/ja/man8/smbumount.8.gz >>>>Port samba-libsmbclient-3.0.0 (net/samba-libsmbclient) <einekoai@chello.nl>: >>>>CONFLICTS= samba-3.* >>>> >>>>Port sharity-light-1.2_1 (net/sharity-light) <ports@FreeBSD.org>: >>>>CONFLICTS= ja-samba-2.* samba-2.* samba-3.*
Trevor Johnson wrote: > Oliver Eikemeier wrote: > >>Trevor Johnson wrote: >> >>>Oliver Eikemeier wrote: >>> >>>>CONFLICTS= samba-* >>>> >>>>is bad, the port will conflict with itself. Use something like: >>> >>>The CONFLICTS lines for the linux_base ports have looked like this for >>>awhile, and they work fine for me. Moreover I haven't seen any complaints >>>about them. >> >>CONFLICTS is very new, so complaints are rare. > > It's not all that new--those lines were added on July 3rd, before > 4.9-RELEASE. > >>The bsd.port.mk target >>`check-already-installed' checks if a port is already installed, >>`check-conflicts' comes before that. You can reinstall a package with >>FORCE_PKG_REGISTER, but will fail because of conflicts checking in this >>case. It is unlikely that people will notice this during normal use, >>but it gives unexpected results in border cases. Don't do it, it's bad >>stlye. And if someone does a samba-doc port, you will conflict with it too. > > I don't see any problem when I do "make all install deinstall reinstall" > (is this what you meant?) but if I do "make install" again afterward, it > fails which IMHO is not bad. Anyway it isn't worth fighting about. The problem occurs if you do make install; make install FORCE_PKG_REGISTER=yes which is somewhat supported, although seldomly (never?) used. >>>>Port ja-samba-2.2.8a.j1.1_3 (japanese/samba) <nakaji@jp.FreeBSD.org>: >>>>CONFLICTS= ja-linux-JM-* samba-2.2.* samba-3.0.* sharity-light-1.* >>> >>>I don't see how japanese/linux-JM conflicts. It installs an smbfs man >>>page, but the other ports don't AFAICT. >> >>Both japanese/samba and japanese/linux-JM install >> man/ja/man8/smbmount.8.gz >> man/ja/man8/smbumount.8.gz >>(and remove it on deinstall). > > Oh, I am hoist by my own petard: it generates its own packing list, > whereas I had only glanced at its port skeleton. It should have a > CONFLICTS line too then: Jepp, it should. > +CONFLICTS= ja-samba-2* samba-3* samba-devel-* CONFLICTS= ja-samba-2.* is enough.
>>>>> In <3FC26F1D.9020103@fillmore-labs.com> >>>>> Oliver Eikemeier <eikemeier@fillmore-labs.com> wrote: > >>>>Port ja-samba-2.2.8a.j1.1_3 (japanese/samba) <nakaji@jp.FreeBSD.org>: > >>>>CONFLICTS= ja-linux-JM-* samba-2.2.* samba-3.0.* sharity-light-1.* > >>> > >>>I don't see how japanese/linux-JM conflicts. It installs an smbfs man > >>>page, but the other ports don't AFAICT. > >> > >>Both japanese/samba and japanese/linux-JM install > >> man/ja/man8/smbmount.8.gz > >> man/ja/man8/smbumount.8.gz > >>(and remove it on deinstall). These files in japanese/linux-JM seem old. It's better to change japanese/linux-JM not to install smbfs manpages. Index: Makefile =================================================================== RCS file: /home/ncvs/ports/japanese/linux-JM/Makefile,v retrieving revision 1.6 diff -u -r1.6 Makefile --- Makefile 7 Mar 2003 06:04:50 -0000 1.6 +++ Makefile 25 Nov 2003 01:41:00 -0000 @@ -33,7 +33,7 @@ mpg123 \ ncftp netatalk \ rdate \ - smbfs sudo \ + sudo \ uudeview \ wu-ftpd Index: distinfo =================================================================== RCS file: /home/ncvs/ports/japanese/linux-JM/distinfo,v retrieving revision 1.2 diff -u -r1.2 distinfo --- distinfo 25 Apr 2001 19:17:04 -0000 1.2 +++ distinfo 25 Nov 2003 01:42:02 -0000 @@ -13,7 +13,6 @@ MD5 (linux-JM/man-pages-ja-ncftp-20010415.tar.gz) = 9f7f054c34bb4cfcf1f48a214bef3753 MD5 (linux-JM/man-pages-ja-netatalk-20010415.tar.gz) = eb2b69301acc99f9c709fbf0cdc34d8f MD5 (linux-JM/man-pages-ja-rdate-20010415.tar.gz) = 4eef62d62342f69837022782d968b23c -MD5 (linux-JM/man-pages-ja-smbfs-20010415.tar.gz) = 1aa072c3b48e52686680b57d41fbedfa MD5 (linux-JM/man-pages-ja-sudo-20010415.tar.gz) = de52c97fffd29f9b67ffcde6745794b0 MD5 (linux-JM/man-pages-ja-uudeview-20010415.tar.gz) = 40383f0f6ddb2ce79e871c13f04df334 MD5 (linux-JM/man-pages-ja-wu-ftpd-20010415.tar.gz) = 3533149d55ee3072373b9209db1eb57c And, for japanese/samba, Index: Makefile =================================================================== RCS file: /home/ncvs/ports/japanese/samba/Makefile,v retrieving revision 1.38 diff -u -r1.38 Makefile --- Makefile 23 Oct 2003 15:11:43 -0000 1.38 +++ Makefile 25 Nov 2003 01:50:43 -0000 @@ -20,6 +20,8 @@ MAINTAINER= nakaji@jp.FreeBSD.org COMMENT= A free SMB and CIFS client and server for UNIX +CONFLICTS= samba-2.2.* samba-3.0.* sharity-light-1.* + SAMBA_VERSION= 2.2.8a SAMBA_JA_VERSION= 1.1 is enough. -- NAKAJI Hiroyuki
NAKAJI Hiroyuki wrote: > These files in japanese/linux-JM seem old. It's better to change > japanese/linux-JM not to install smbfs manpages. This sounds good, but it would IMO warrant a PORTREVISION bump and therefore a change to the INDEX--portmgr? -- Trevor Johnson
Trevor Johnson wrote: > NAKAJI Hiroyuki wrote: > > >>These files in japanese/linux-JM seem old. It's better to change >>japanese/linux-JM not to install smbfs manpages. > > This sounds good, but it would IMO warrant a PORTREVISION bump and > therefore a change to the INDEX--portmgr? How about marking the ports as conflicting for 5.2 and remove the smbfs manpages after the ports freeze is over?
NAKAJI Hiroyuki wrote: > These files in japanese/linux-JM seem old. It's better to change > japanese/linux-JM not to install smbfs manpages. > > Index: Makefile > =================================================================== > RCS file: /home/ncvs/ports/japanese/linux-JM/Makefile,v > retrieving revision 1.6 > diff -u -r1.6 Makefile > --- Makefile 7 Mar 2003 06:04:50 -0000 1.6 > +++ Makefile 25 Nov 2003 01:41:00 -0000 > @@ -33,7 +33,7 @@ > mpg123 \ > ncftp netatalk \ > rdate \ > - smbfs sudo \ > + sudo \ > uudeview \ > wu-ftpd > > Index: distinfo > =================================================================== > RCS file: /home/ncvs/ports/japanese/linux-JM/distinfo,v > retrieving revision 1.2 > diff -u -r1.2 distinfo > --- distinfo 25 Apr 2001 19:17:04 -0000 1.2 > +++ distinfo 25 Nov 2003 01:42:02 -0000 > @@ -13,7 +13,6 @@ > MD5 (linux-JM/man-pages-ja-ncftp-20010415.tar.gz) = 9f7f054c34bb4cfcf1f48a214bef3753 > MD5 (linux-JM/man-pages-ja-netatalk-20010415.tar.gz) = eb2b69301acc99f9c709fbf0cdc34d8f > MD5 (linux-JM/man-pages-ja-rdate-20010415.tar.gz) = 4eef62d62342f69837022782d968b23c > -MD5 (linux-JM/man-pages-ja-smbfs-20010415.tar.gz) = 1aa072c3b48e52686680b57d41fbedfa > MD5 (linux-JM/man-pages-ja-sudo-20010415.tar.gz) = de52c97fffd29f9b67ffcde6745794b0 > MD5 (linux-JM/man-pages-ja-uudeview-20010415.tar.gz) = 40383f0f6ddb2ce79e871c13f04df334 > MD5 (linux-JM/man-pages-ja-wu-ftpd-20010415.tar.gz) = 3533149d55ee3072373b9209db1eb57c I've committed the CONFLICTS lines. I think this PR should be turned over to sada, in case he wants to apply your patch. -- Trevor Johnson
On Tue, 2003-11-25 at 06:58, Oliver Eikemeier wrote: > Trevor Johnson wrote: > > NAKAJI Hiroyuki wrote: > > > > > >>These files in japanese/linux-JM seem old. It's better to change > >>japanese/linux-JM not to install smbfs manpages. > > > > This sounds good, but it would IMO warrant a PORTREVISION bump and > > therefore a change to the INDEX--portmgr? > > How about marking the ports as conflicting for 5.2 and remove the > smbfs manpages after the ports freeze is over? That works for me. However, at this point, INDEX changes are allowed. We haven't tagged the tree yet. If the proper fix is to remove the smbfs manpage, that's okay right now. Joe -- PGP Key : http://www.marcuscom.com/pgp.asc
Responsible Changed From-To: dwcjr->freebsd-ports-bugs samba* maintainership was reset to ports@ by marcus on 03/04/2004, so return this PR to the pool.
State Changed From-To: open->closed During the time since this PR was filed, some of the changes have been implemented elsewhere. I *believe* that I have implemented the rest of them, which it sounds like various people had agreed to during a prior freeze, but after which the PR had become neglected.