#29522: sox: conflicts with play --------------------------------------+------------------------------------- Reporter: ciserlohn@… | Owner: david@… Type: defect | Status: new Priority: Normal | Milestone: Component: ports | Version: 1.9.2 Keywords: haspatch | Port: sox, play --------------------------------------+------------------------------------- Comment(by ciserlohn@…): Replying to [comment:1 ryandesign@…]:
Right. See [comment:ticket:28799:8] where I asked the author of the new play port if this conflict was necessary or if there was a way to avoid it. Failing a response to that inquiry, I guess we'll have to add the conflict to the sox port as in your patch.
Sorry about that. I got the the notification mail that you committed the play port while I was on vacation. After being home again, I had simply forgotten that issue because the ticket was already closed. While I've didn't tested it yet, it should be possible to install the play binary under a different name. But I wouldn't recommend to do so because the play port only installs this one binary. If it is only available under a different name, no one could use the macports version of play like it is described on the play homepage, various articles on the internet or in printed java magazines. This gives the users of the macports version of play a really bad user experience. As I understand it, it's not possible to indicate a specific port variant for the "conflicts" keyword? Maybe we could add a second non-conflicting play port and add appropriate notes to all three ports (play, play-nc and sox)? Any suggestions? -- Ticket URL: <https://trac.macports.org/ticket/29522#comment:2> MacPorts <http://www.macports.org/> Ports system for Mac OS