Conflicts due to renamed KDE4 ports

[Tijl Coosemans]

On Tue, 17 Apr 2018 00:42:48 +0200 Adriaan de Groot <adridg at freebsd.org> wrote:
> [where did this discussion take place, earlier? this is the first I've seen it]
> 
> So, there are roughly two migration paths: supposing someone has x11/kde4 
> installed, which has dependencies on many applications and a Plasma 4 desktop, 
> kde@ wants (wanted) to make it possible to migrate to a still-KDE4 desktop, 
> while renaming everything to have a -kde4 suffix. The other path is to migrate 
> to the latest-and-greatest-from-KDE .. we don't have a metaport for that, and 
> if we do get one it probably won't be called x11/kde5.
> 
> For single applications, the migration looks similar: you had, around january 
> 2018, port <foo>. That's the KDE4 version. Now there is port <foo>-kde4, if 
> you want to stick to KDE4 software (which is no longer released upstream, and 
> is based on an EOL toolkit, but some people feel quite strongly about this). 
> Ports <foo> are returning, without a suffix, to mean "the latest-and-greatest-
> version-of-<foo>". This is consistent with other ports which have a <foo>, 
> sometimes a <foo>-devel for upcoming things, and a <foo>-<version> for older 
> versions if you have specific dependencies on old versions.
> 
> Historically, things were a mess with naming with the KDE ports. We think 
> we've got a good scheme now: <foo>-kde4 (and in the far future, <foo>-kf5) for 
> versions of the software based on an older stack, and <foo> for the current 
> one. But the pain of getting from the mess to something better organized has 
> to happen at some point.

What happens when you run pkg upgrade on a 6 months old installation of KDE4?