Ports audio/musicpd and net/mpd use same name for distiles. cub@demani:ttyp3(/usr/ports)% cat audio/musicpd/distinfo MD5 (mpd-0.11.0.tar.gz) = 7ee41a7699e46ab596c7df5619689469 SIZE (mpd-0.11.0.tar.gz) = 1114000 cub@demani:ttyp3(/usr/ports)% cat net/mpd/distinfo MD5 (mpd-3.18.tar.gz) = 4fdd913870dc29f29eed8f0442cd54bb Fix: n/a How-To-Repeat: n/a
Kostyuk Oleg wrote: > Ports audio/musicpd and net/mpd use same name for distiles. > > cub@demani:ttyp3(/usr/ports)% cat audio/musicpd/distinfo > MD5 (mpd-0.11.0.tar.gz) = 7ee41a7699e46ab596c7df5619689469 > SIZE (mpd-0.11.0.tar.gz) = 1114000 > > cub@demani:ttyp3(/usr/ports)% cat net/mpd/distinfo > MD5 (mpd-3.18.tar.gz) = 4fdd913870dc29f29eed8f0442cd54bb The chance that one day both will have the same version number is small, I would just trust our fortune in this case. This could be solved by using DIST_SUBDIR on the next upgrade when this is considered a risk. Any opinions from the maintainers? -Oliver
State Changed From-To: open->feedback Asked whether this is considered a real risk
Responsible Changed From-To: freebsd-ports-bugs->archie Over to the maintainer that is also a committer
Oliver Eikemeier wrote: > Kostyuk Oleg wrote: > >> Ports audio/musicpd and net/mpd use same name for distiles. >> >> cub@demani:ttyp3(/usr/ports)% cat audio/musicpd/distinfo >> MD5 (mpd-0.11.0.tar.gz) = 7ee41a7699e46ab596c7df5619689469 >> SIZE (mpd-0.11.0.tar.gz) = 1114000 >> >> cub@demani:ttyp3(/usr/ports)% cat net/mpd/distinfo >> MD5 (mpd-3.18.tar.gz) = 4fdd913870dc29f29eed8f0442cd54bb > > > The chance that one day both will have the same version number is small, > I would just trust our fortune in this case. Me too. Even if they will one day use the same number, I can still use Oliver's DIST_SUBDIR approach. Anyway, I think musicpd will be internally renamed from mpd to musicpd some time, because there's also this stupid name-conflict that exists with executables that I will remove in the next version-upgrade. So my suggestion would be to ignore things, the chances that musicpd will cross 3.x barrier are quite low ;o) and even if, I'm aware that either the mpd mainainer or me has to do something. > This could be solved by using DIST_SUBDIR on the next upgrade when this > is considered a risk. Any opinions from the maintainers? Uh yeah... this was mine *g* If mpd is not gonna use DIST_SUBDIR in the next version-upgrade, I will do so, so you can safely close the PR, it won't be forgotten. - Mark -- Fortune cookie of the hour: Fine day to work off excess energy. Steal something heavy.
State Changed From-To: feedback->closed Added DIST_SUBDIR to mpd port.