Bug 148783 - [bsd.port.mk] [patch] add LATEST_LINK and CONFLICTS to INDEX
Summary: [bsd.port.mk] [patch] add LATEST_LINK and CONFLICTS to INDEX
Status: Closed Overcome By Events
Alias: None
Product: Ports & Packages
Classification: Unclassified
Component: Individual Port(s) (show other bugs)
Version: Latest
Hardware: Any Any
: Normal Affects Only Me
Assignee: Port Management Team
URL:
Keywords:
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2010-07-20 11:30 UTC by kamikaze
Modified: 2014-06-15 22:05 UTC (History)
1 user (show)

See Also:


Attachments
file.diff (302 bytes, patch)
2010-07-20 11:30 UTC, kamikaze
no flags Details | Diff

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description kamikaze 2010-07-20 11:30:01 UTC
This patch addresses two problems vital for binary only package management tools that rely on the INDEX. The first one, LATEST_LINK is a convenience, but CONFLICTS strikes me as really important.

LATEST_LINK
- Useful to interpret user provided parameters, e.g. pkg_upgrade has 80
  lines of code dedicated to guessing package names that look like LATEST_LINK
  names
- Can be used to always download the latest available version of a package

CONFLICTS
- Without it packages have to be downloaded to recognize that they conflict with
  existing packages

Fix: Patch attached with submission follows:
Comment 1 Mark Linimon freebsd_committer freebsd_triage 2010-07-20 17:59:05 UTC
Responsible Changed
From-To: freebsd-ports-bugs->portmgr

bsd.port.mk patch.
Comment 2 Chris Rees freebsd_committer 2012-06-11 19:24:54 UTC
State Changed
From-To: open->feedback

Several issues here. 

Portsnap will break with this-- you'll need to check with cperciva on 
how to implement this 

Did you test the generated INDEX?  The /usr/ports/Tools/make_index 
script will choke on / ignore these parts, so that will also need 
patching.
Comment 3 Baptiste Daroussin freebsd_committer 2014-06-15 21:41:28 UTC
First LATEST_LINK is now at a dead end and should be totally dropped one day
INDEX is of less use now with pkg(8) do we really need to still work on something like this?
Comment 4 kamikaze 2014-06-15 22:05:45 UTC
Not relevant for pkgng.