On 2026/09/20 07:01, David Uhden Collado wrote: > The main goal of the packaging is to make these implementations usable > as alternatives to the existing GNU utility ports without requiring > source changes in dependent ports. > > For example, uutils-coreutils installs the same g-prefixed command names > as sysutils/coreutils, including gcat, gls, gcp, gdate, gsort, gstat, > gtail, gtimeout and the other GNU-compatible utilities. They are > symlinks to the upstream multicall binary, which is installed under > libexec/uutils. ... > Each package conflicts with its corresponding GNU implementation and > declares the GNU port as a secondary @pkgpath.
I don't think this is a usable approach for ports.
