From owner-svn-ports-head@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Aug 11 07:07:45 2014 Return-Path: Delivered-To: svn-ports-head@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [8.8.178.115]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A960ED71; Mon, 11 Aug 2014 07:07:45 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail.issp.ac.ru (mail.issp.ac.ru [77.236.34.3]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "relay.issp.ac.ru", Issuer "relay.issp.ac.ru" (not verified)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2A7C627CB; Mon, 11 Aug 2014 07:07:44 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mercury.issp.ac.ru [77.236.34.155:60135] (HELO/EHLO mercury.ph.man.ac.uk, authenticated with PLAIN) by mail.issp.ac.ru with ESMTP/inet id s7B781Ww037368 (using TLSv1/SSLv3, with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256 bits), verified NO) Mon, 11 Aug 2014 11:08:01 +0400 (MSK) X-Authentication-Warning: mail.issp.ac.ru: Host mercury.issp.ac.ru [77.236.34.155] claimed to be mercury.ph.man.ac.uk From: Max Brazhnikov To: Matthew Seaman Subject: Re: svn commit: r364287 - head/ports-mgmt/pkg-devel Date: Mon, 11 Aug 2014 07:07:38 +0000 Message-ID: <9845655.c1l7BLfd1M@mercury.ph.man.ac.uk> User-Agent: KMail/4.12.5 (FreeBSD/9.3-PRERELEASE; KDE/4.12.5; amd64; ; ) In-Reply-To: <53E7F110.7010105@FreeBSD.org> References: <53e39939.55bc.4ca5432c@svn.freebsd.org> <53E7D193.3090305@FreeBSD.org> <53E7F110.7010105@FreeBSD.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" Cc: svn-ports-head@freebsd.org, Vsevolod Stakhov , svn-ports-all@freebsd.org, ports-committers@freebsd.org, Matthias Andree , Tijl Coosemans , Bryan Drewery X-BeenThere: svn-ports-head@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: SVN commit messages for the ports tree for head List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 11 Aug 2014 07:07:45 -0000 On Sun, 10 Aug 2014 23:24:16 +0100 Matthew Seaman wrote: > On 10/08/2014 21:09, Vsevolod Stakhov wrote: > > Nonetheless, doesn't our ports policy defines to bump PORTREVISION in > > all cases that modifies a resulting package? Shlib provides/requires > > changing is definitely such a change. So you blame now pkg that it > > follows the current policy, don't you? > > Bumping PORTREVISION in this situation is the standard policy only > because we previously lacked the tools to update dependent ports on > shlib ABI changes without it. > > Ideally, pkg(8) will be able to make that policy obsolete by automating > away the manual reverse-dependency tracking that should be (but is not > always) being done at the moment. It won't work in all cases anyway. I can give examples of ports, that must be rebuilt if dependency gets updated, and it's not related to shared libraries.