Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sat, 19 Mar 2016 16:43:18 +0100
From:      John Marino <freebsd.contact@marino.st>
To:        Jan Beich <jbeich@vfemail.net>, Dirk Meyer <dinoex@FreeBSD.org>
Cc:        ports-committers@freebsd.org, svn-ports-all@freebsd.org, svn-ports-head@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: svn commit: r411385 - head/www/lighttpd/files
Message-ID:  <56ED7396.4050104@marino.st>
In-Reply-To: <pouq-db4y-wny@vfemail.net>
References:  <201603190938.u2J9cF4c014563@repo.freebsd.org> <pouq-db4y-wny@vfemail.net>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 3/19/2016 11:18 AM, Jan Beich wrote:
> Dirk Meyer <dinoex@FreeBSD.org> writes:
> Can you bump PORTREVISION ? According to Porter's Handbook
>
>    PORTREVISION must be increased each time a change is made to the port
>    that changes the generated package in any way. That includes changes
>    that only affect a package built with *non-default options*.

Is that true?
It's open for interpretation, and I've never interpreted it that way. 
I've seen other use the same rationale (doesn't affect packages with 
default options) as a reason not to bump.

If all things are perfect, I agree with you, but people get pretty upset 
when a port rebuilds for a weak reason.  Making something huge rebuild 
to help out people that customize the port might be "weak" in that sense.

In any case, the above interpretation is news for me.

John



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?56ED7396.4050104>