On Mon, Jun 04, 2012 at 03:15:20PM +0100, Stuart Henderson wrote: > On 2012/06/01 22:31, wen heping wrote: > > +@conflict archivers/pecl-zip > > @conflict takes a package name, not a path. If you think about it, > it has to be this way, because it can record a conflict with something > which may no longer be in ports, so there's no way the build > infrastructure can work out a reasonable package name from the path.
There's also the fact that, in the end, it will be a binary package, and binary packages know squat about the build infrastructure *without looking* within packages, so having a 'first line of defense' that actually only cares about the package names is the only efficient way to do things...
