Date: Sat, 19 Sep 2015 07:20:48 +0000 From: Alexey Dokuchaev <danfe@FreeBSD.org> To: Mathieu Arnold <mat@FreeBSD.org> Cc: "Timur I. Bakeyev" <timur@com.bat.ru>, Dmitry Marakasov <amdmi3@freebsd.org>, ports-committers@freebsd.org, svn-ports-all <svn-ports-all@freebsd.org>, svn-ports-head <svn-ports-head@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: svn commit: r396998 - head/net/samba36 Message-ID: <20150919072048.GA86129@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <0FAE77426236E9E47E15BFC1@atuin.in.mat.cc> References: <201509151622.t8FGMXQY074723@repo.freebsd.org> <CALdFvJE17udNUQ=Y5JxwHphn2TWRMh-213_LfP-YOM3MN1Qx2A@mail.gmail.com> <0FAE77426236E9E47E15BFC1@atuin.in.mat.cc>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sat, Sep 19, 2015 at 09:05:52AM +0200, Mathieu Arnold wrote: > +--On 19 septembre 2015 01:20:59 +0200 "Timur I. Bakeyev" > <timur@com.bat.ru> wrote: > | Was it really neessary to bump port revision for the change > > I'll cut at that. Yes, it was, the resulting package changed, so, yes, > bumping PORTREVISION is mandatory. Oh please Mathieu, not this "read PHB, no thinking required" bullcrap again. Apparently you don't realize how much of PITA these bumps for no real reason can be. Port revision should be bumped if there was something *wrong* with the previous package, or rebuild is *really* necessary due to breaking change in its dependencies. Perhaps frequent rebuilds is not a problem for binary package users or multicore machines with shitloads of RAM and fast storage, but 1) if I wanted to use binary packages, I guess Debian would be a better choice as they've got it well before we did, and 2) I don't have, and hardly ever will have that high-profile hardware. ./danfe
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20150919072048.GA86129>