On Fri, Aug 07, 2009 at 12:47:33PM -0400, Daniel Macks wrote: > On Fri, Aug 07, 2009 at 11:23:47AM -0500, Robert Wyatt wrote: > > I had gdal-dev and -shlibs installed (but not gdal) and in updating all > > I had to manually remove gdal-dev in order to update gdal-shlibs. [...] > > gdal: > > depends: gdal-shlibs (= 1.6.1-1001) > > buildconflicts: gdal-dev (<< 1.6.1)
The greater question is, why do we need that BuildConflicts? A more robust solution would be to tweak the makefiles or other building scripts be adjusted to ignore an already-installed gdal-dev. BConflicts is a perpetual hack, because it assumes that maintainer knows all possible provider pkgs of whatever causes the problem (different libversion with different name, or user may have a locally written variant or alternate name with different build options, for example). dan -- Daniel Macks dma...@netspace.org http://www.netspace.org/~dmacks ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Let Crystal Reports handle the reporting - Free Crystal Reports 2008 30-Day trial. Simplify your report design, integration and deployment - and focus on what you do best, core application coding. Discover what's new with Crystal Reports now. http://p.sf.net/sfu/bobj-july _______________________________________________ Fink-users mailing list Fink-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fink-users
