[aur-general] what is the best way to resolve conflicting files in aur packages?

[Ng Oon-Ee]

On Thu, 2010-09-09 at 09:53 +0200, Lukáš Jirkovský wrote:
> On 8 September 2010 22:00, Alex Combas <alex.combas at gmail.com> wrote:
> > What is the best way to resolve conflicting files in aur packages?
> >
> > I've run into this issue a couple times recently, first of all with
> > "panda3d-cvs" and "cuda-toolkit" both contained the file /usr/bin/bin2c
> >
> > The result was the panda3d-cvs maintainer just removed the file since he
> > said it wasn't doing anything anyway.
> >
> > Now I've run into a similar problem but this time the maintainer fixed it a
> > different way and it broke my package.
> >
> > opencl-headers http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=35367 has 3 files
> > which are also provided by nvidia-utils
> >
> > So now to fix it the maintainer of opencl-headers has added
> > conflicts=(nvidia-utils) to his package.
> >
> > But my problem is that I recently made  a package (luxrays-hg) which
> > depends=('nvidia-utils') and also makedepends=('opencl-headers')
> >
> > So my package (luxrays-hg) will no longer install because 2 of
> > its decencies (opencl-headers & nvidia-utils) are in conflict.
> >
> > So what is the best practice in this situation?
> >
> >
> > --
> > Best regards,
> > Alex Combas
> > goplexian.com
> >
> 
> Hello Alex,
> as Jonathan said the best thing would be to wait for a new driver
> release with openCL headers removed.
> 
> By the way I tried to use the headers supplied with nvidia-utils but
> compilation fails with them. I was able to build luxrays-hg with
> forcing opencl-headers to install (headers from nvidia-utils are
> overwritten then). Maybe you can post a note to the package comments
> that the users should force the installation of opencl-headers until
> there is a new nvidia-utils in the repo.

Nvidia's beta release has shifted some headers (not sure if they're
these specific ones) out of the driver.