Date: Sat, 28 Mar 2009 21:01:24 +0100 (CET) From: Gerald Pfeifer <gerald@pfeifer.com> To: David O'Brien <obrien@FreeBSD.org> Cc: cvs-ports@FreeBSD.org, Wesley Shields <wxs@FreeBSD.org>, Pav Lucistnik <pav@FreeBSD.org>, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org, ports-committers@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: ports/shells/bash Makefile pkg-plist Message-ID: <alpine.LSU.1.99.0903282055440.11029@acrux.dbai.tuwien.ac.at> In-Reply-To: <20090324043028.GA34952@dragon.NUXI.org> References: <200903120954.n2C9s2ev063133@repoman.freebsd.org> <20090313023956.GA49511@dragon.NUXI.org> <49BA52D2.8090209@FreeBSD.org> <20090323231412.GA94221@hub.freebsd.org> <20090324012325.GB1292@atarininja.org> <20090324043028.GA34952@dragon.NUXI.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, 23 Mar 2009, David O'Brien wrote: >>> Is there ever a change then that doesn't require a bump in either >>> PORTREVISION or PORTVERSION? >> Just changing the maintainer should not require the user to do anything. > That is the only case I can think of. Even changing the comment or > pkg-descr should have its PORTREVISION bumped in order to get a new > package built so users have the fresh description. Setting FORCE_MAKE_JOBS would be another example which should not trigger a rebuild for the user. Or something like the following, which I had embedded in some other lang/gcc42 changes, but would have committed by itself otherwise: "Remove gcc-testsuite from DISTFILES, along with the post-build and check targets. This reduces disk and bandwidth consumptions for a feature (apparently) never used." Gerald
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?alpine.LSU.1.99.0903282055440.11029>