--9crTWz/Z+Zyzu20v
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Sat, Oct 19, 2002 at 04:26:02PM -0400, Greg A. Woods wrote:
> 	security/ssh should conflict with security/ssh2

Why?

Unless the world has changed drastically since the last time I used
FSecure SSH on a Unix-like system (admittedly, more than a little
while ago), security/ssh installs itself as ssh[d]1[-*], then sym
links to ssh[d,-*] to it. security/ssh2 installs itself as ssh[d]2[-*]
and then sym links ssh[d,-*] to itself.

If you install security/ssh2 first and then security/ssh1 second,
you deserve what you get. Perhaps a warning in MESSAGE is in order,
but I don't see why they need to conflict; the only overlapping=20
files should be sym links (provided our patches aren't changing
that install behavior).

--=20
gabriel rosenkoetter
gr@eclipsed.net

--9crTWz/Z+Zyzu20v
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
Content-Disposition: inline

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.7 (NetBSD)

iD8DBQE9taeS9ehacAz5CRoRAkjPAJwJ/7McaZm6rSO88xhPttXm2+y/hgCdGCDB
PV0gBMxmmpH3qsLeDUBa4bA=
=iT53
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--9crTWz/Z+Zyzu20v--