From owner-freebsd-ports Mon Aug 5 10:29:25 2002 Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.FreeBSD.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BD0C037B400 for ; Mon, 5 Aug 2002 10:29:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: from heaven.gigo.com (heaven.gigo.com [64.57.102.22]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2256A442FA for ; Mon, 5 Aug 2002 10:16:42 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from lioux@brturbo.com) Received: from 200-193-225-182-bsace7003.dsl.telebrasilia.net.br (200-193-225-182-bsace7003.dsl.telebrasilia.net.br [200.193.225.182]) by heaven.gigo.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8999FB897 for ; Mon, 5 Aug 2002 10:16:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: (qmail 17479 invoked by uid 1001); 5 Aug 2002 16:59:36 -0000 Message-ID: <20020805165936.17478.qmail@exxodus.fedaykin.here> Date: Mon, 5 Aug 2002 13:59:14 -0300 From: Mario Sergio Fujikawa Ferreira To: Christian Weisgerber Cc: freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: ports/41258: converters/recode needs new port revision References: <200208041821.g74IL7f3090456@freefall.freebsd.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.4i X-Operating-System: FreeBSD 4.6-STABLE X-Disclaimer: I hope you find what you are looking for... in life :) Sender: owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.org On Sun, Aug 04, 2002 at 10:21:45PM +0000, Christian Weisgerber wrote: > Mario Sergio Fujikawa Ferreira wrote: > > > State-Changed-From-To: open->feedback > > > > Is this fixed? > > There is disagreement among the ports committers whether such library > updates should really cause revision bumps in all depending ports. > (There is also the problem of direct dependencies that are only > transitively registered.) > > In this case, ade chose not to bump the dependent ports. > > Either way, we should do all or none. Well, my personal perception of this is that one should use portupgrade to make sure that the dependencies are dealt accordingly. $ cd /var/db/pkg $ portupgrade -u library_port* $ portupgrade -fru library_port* -x library_port* However, make sure you understand what this is doing before using it: man portupgrade IMHO, PORTREVISION bumps should be used for library updates ONLY when there is some weird interaction that portupgrade won't be able to handle. Example? Recent qt3 update to 3.0.5, kdebase3 and kdelibs3. portupgrade triggered compilation of kdebase3 but kdelibs3 should be built 1st, we need to either change something in the dependency list or do version bumps in that situation. Later was preferred for a quick solution, the former is being pursued. However, as you can see, this is not our standard practice. Regards, -- Mario S F Ferreira - DF - Brazil - "I guess this is a signature." Computer Science Undergraduate | FreeBSD Committer | CS Developer flames to beloved devnull@someotherworldbeloworabove.org feature, n: a documented bug | bug, n: an undocumented feature To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-ports" in the body of the message