[MacPorts] #74180: LMDB 1.0.0 concerns

[MacPorts]

#74180: LMDB 1.0.0 concerns
-----------------------+--------------------
  Reporter:  artkiver  |      Owner:  (none)
      Type:  defect    |     Status:  new
  Priority:  Normal    |  Milestone:
 Component:  ports     |    Version:
Resolution:            |   Keywords:
      Port:  lmdb      |
-----------------------+--------------------
Changes (by ryandesign):

 * port:   => lmdb


Comment:

 What you're discussing here is not a problem with our currently-published
 Portfiles; they're only concerns with changes you are working on
 developing. Questions about developing Portfiles are best asked on the
 [https://lists.macports.org/mailman/listinfo/macports-dev macports-dev
 mailing list]. The issue tracker is for bug reports and feature requests.


 Replying to [ticket:74180 artkiver]:
 > So, I thought, maybe I should instead create a new port for 1.0.0?
 >
 > Doing so (calling it lmdb-devel) I encountered the following locally
 (already having installed lmdb):
 >
 > {{{
 > --->  Activating lmdb-devel @1.0.0_0
 > Error: Failed to activate lmdb-devel: The following ports have active
 files that conflict with lmdb-devel's:
 > lmdb @1.0.0_0
 >   /opt/local/bin/mdb_copy
 >   /opt/local/bin/mdb_drop
 >   /opt/local/bin/mdb_dump
 >   (... 13 more not shown)
 > Image error: Conflicting file(s) present. Please deactivate the
 conflicting port(s) first, or use 'port -f activate lmdb-devel' to force
 the activation.
 > }}}
 >
 > So, I am not really sure if having two LMDB ports is going to work? Or
 maybe, this is because I created a local lmdb-devel port, for the same
 version of LMDB?

 So you created a new lmdb-devel port, and it installs files with the same
 names and paths as the lmdb port, which you also had installed and active.
 Therefore, MacPorts could not activate the new lmdb-devel port, hence the
 error message.

 You should not have forced the activation of the new port. Instead, when
 told there were conflicting files, you should have deactivated the
 conflicting port.

 If you want there to be two ports, you have two options. One is to accept
 that the two ports conflict, and communicate that to the user by adding
 the `conflicts` keyword to both ports. For ports named "x" and "x-devel",
 this is the usual strategy.

 The other option is to reengineer one or both of the ports so that they
 install their files to paths that do not conflict. If this method is
 chosen, a different port naming strategy using version suffixes is used,
 such as "x-0.9" and "x-1.0".

 Do you need two ports? I don't know. Maybe not, since a user wishing to
 get back to the older version of the port could always do so using
 wiki:howto/InstallingOlderPort.

-- 
Ticket URL: <https://trac.macports.org/ticket/74180#comment:1>
MacPorts <https://www.macports.org/>
Ports system for macOS