On 2026/09/20 07:01, David Uhden Collado wrote:
> The main goal of the packaging is to make these implementations usable
> as alternatives to the existing GNU utility ports without requiring
> source changes in dependent ports.
> 
> For example, uutils-coreutils installs the same g-prefixed command names
> as sysutils/coreutils, including gcat, gls, gcp, gdate, gsort, gstat,
> gtail, gtimeout and the other GNU-compatible utilities. They are
> symlinks to the upstream multicall binary, which is installed under
> libexec/uutils.
...
> Each package conflicts with its corresponding GNU implementation and
> declares the GNU port as a secondary @pkgpath.

I don't think this is a usable approach for ports.