render port is being replaced with xorg-renderproto port

[Ryan Schmidt]

On Nov 10, 2008, at 17:21, Ryan Schmidt wrote:

> On Nov 10, 2008, at 04:59, Ryan Schmidt wrote:
>
>> On Nov 10, 2008, at 04:28, Emmanuel Hainry wrote:
>>
>>> Isn't it possible to update render to a pseudo newer version that  
>>> has no
>>> file
>>
>> Yes, I just did that. Unfortunately I had not completed all my  
>> modifications by the time the portindex was regenerated, so I  
>> wanted to notify users of the issue.
>>
>>> but depends on xorg-renderproto? Or else to have some kind of
>>> "superseding" mechanism?
>>
>> Making render depend on xorg-renderproto will not work: the  
>> dependency xorg-renderproto would be built first before render  
>> would be updated to the no-files version. You would be guaranteed  
>> to get exactly the conflict message we're trying to avoid.
>>
>> Making xorg-renderproto depend on render might work. I could  
>> change the render port again to not issue the message I added,  
>> advising users to uninstall it, but instead let it sit around  
>> empty for awhile until everyone has upgraded. Then later I can  
>> increase the revision and re-add that message. I don't know if  
>> this is better than what I did; it's all a bit messy. If someone  
>> feels strongly about this they can change things. For now, I'm  
>> going to bed. :)
>
> I just did this (making xorg-renderproto depend on render) since  
> the upgrade was not going smoothly without this.

This seems to be working. The correct procedure now is simply to  
"port upgrade" your outdated ports. The render port will stick around  
for now (containing no files except a readme). Some time later render  
will be removed.