Date: Thu, 11 Sep 2014 21:46:56 +0200 (CEST) From: Gerald Pfeifer <gerald@pfeifer.com> To: Dmitry Marakasov <amdmi3@amdmi3.ru> Cc: svn-ports-head@freebsd.org, svn-ports-all@freebsd.org, ports-committers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: svn commit: r367888 - in head: accessibility/accerciser accessibility/jovie accessibility/kaccessible accessibility/kdeaccessibility4 accessibility/kmag accessibility/kmousetool accessibility/kmout... Message-ID: <alpine.LSU.2.11.1409112122130.2669@tuna.site> In-Reply-To: <20140911103218.GB1692@hades.panopticon> References: <201409102050.s8AKobw3056642@svn.freebsd.org> <20140911000146.GO43982@hades.panopticon> <20140911001739.GP43982@hades.panopticon> <alpine.LSU.2.11.1409110220490.2867@tuna.site> <20140911103218.GB1692@hades.panopticon>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, 11 Sep 2014, Dmitry Marakasov wrote:
>> I used INDEX-10 and the Tools/scripts/bump_revision.pl script
>> (that I had been using before for similar changes).
> Now I'm really interested how it's generated. Mine has 1693 mentions
> of gcc, not 3000+
I downloaded INDEX-10 with `make fetchindex` on ref10-i386, and see
the numbers below:
% grep gcc-4.8 INDEX-10 | wc -l
3386
% Tools/scripts/bump_revision.pl -c -n -i INDEX-10 lang/gcc | wc -l
3319
The numbers when generating INDEX-10 using `make index` are in the
same ballpark.
I'm starting to feel really bad about this update of mine. This is
not the first such PORTREVISION bump I am doing, and I do not see
where I made a substantial mistake. Yet, something apparently went
wrong. :-(
Gerald
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?alpine.LSU.2.11.1409112122130.2669>