Date: Mon, 11 Aug 2014 07:07:38 +0000 From: Max Brazhnikov <makc@freebsd.org> To: Matthew Seaman <matthew@freebsd.org> Cc: svn-ports-head@freebsd.org, Vsevolod Stakhov <vsevolod@freebsd.org>, svn-ports-all@freebsd.org, ports-committers@freebsd.org, Matthias Andree <matthias.andree@gmx.de>, Tijl Coosemans <tijl@freebsd.org>, Bryan Drewery <bdrewery@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: svn commit: r364287 - head/ports-mgmt/pkg-devel Message-ID: <9845655.c1l7BLfd1M@mercury.ph.man.ac.uk> In-Reply-To: <53E7F110.7010105@FreeBSD.org> References: <53e39939.55bc.4ca5432c@svn.freebsd.org> <53E7D193.3090305@FreeBSD.org> <53E7F110.7010105@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
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.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?9845655.c1l7BLfd1M>