Re: postgresql packages, PG_SUBPREFIX and CONFLICTS

[Joerg Sonnenberger <joerg%britannica.bec.de@localhost>]

On Wed, Oct 24, 2012 at 12:44:55AM +0300, Aleksey Cheusov wrote:
> >> Package conflict is a fact that is detected automatically already.
> 
> >This is not completely true. There is a valid reason for setting
> >CONFLICTS if the overlap is in files that are not in the PLIST.
> >E.g. if the only conflict is in configuration files etc.
> >
> >Use by pkgin is no justification, there could be a separate index
> >computed for a set of binary packages that provides conflict hints.
> 
> Information about common files in packages can easily be gathered by
> bulk build tools. I do this in distbb for debugging purposes. See
> 
>   
> http://mova.org/~cheusov/pub/bulk/NetBSD/i386/5.1/2012Q3/logs/20121004.1013/META/check_unregistered_CONFLICTS.html
> 
> for example. Of course I'm able to use this list for enriching
> pkg_summary(5) and forget about manually registering CONFLICTS forever.
> However, this is not right way to go. Handling conflicting packages
> *manually* allows us to find and fix *bugs* in pkgsrc.

All this instances can be found and "fixed" without adding manual
CONFLICTS. What you did is add yet another set of redundant entries that
are highly likely to be outdated at some point without any indicator
whatsoever that they are really needed. As such, it is obscuring the
real cases. As such, IMO the correct way forward is to remove *all*
CONFLICTS unless proven that they are required for dealing with issues
outside the scope of the existing automatic check.

Joerg