Date: Mon, 7 Oct 2019 09:58:06 +0200 From: Mathieu Arnold <mat@FreeBSD.org> To: "Mikhail T." <mi+thun@aldan.algebra.com> Cc: Tobias Kortkamp <tobik@freebsd.org>, Gleb Popov <arrowd@freebsd.org>, ports-committers@freebsd.org, svn-ports-all@freebsd.org, svn-ports-head@freebsd.org Subject: Re: svn commit: r513679 - head/sysutils/fusefs-smbnetfs/files Message-ID: <20191007075806.hwt3esdx5rrart37@atuin.in.mat.cc> In-Reply-To: <f26493f6-8ba8-c926-0402-f76b3d55926a@aldan.algebra.com> References: <201910031745.x93Hje5x059120@repo.freebsd.org> <20191006054444.GB62549@urd.tobik.me> <CALH631=WA=D2gRWG4t72CMr4Z%2BOt5303ZV-1ng0uQ0ZiRGs1WA@mail.gmail.com> <20191006081114.GA33887@urd.tobik.me> <f26493f6-8ba8-c926-0402-f76b3d55926a@aldan.algebra.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--q4nwj7ty6yylwf5s Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Sun, Oct 06, 2019 at 11:07:42PM -0400, Mikhail T. wrote: > On 06.10.19 04:11, Tobias Kortkamp wrote: > > We do not have options specific PORTREVISIONs and there are more package > > repositories than pkg.FreeBSD.org. If you have previously built your > > packages with LIBSECRET=3Don, the applied fix will change the package i= n a > > non-trivial way. However since PORTREVISION was not bumped Poudriere or > > other package builders will not rebuild the package. Bascially people > > will have to micromanage/force the rebuild fusefs-smbnetfs if they want > > this fix. fusefs-smbnetfs is hardly an expensive package to build so > > saving rebuilds at the cost of wasting people's time is not worth it and > > bad UX. >=20 > What I'm trying to avoid is the opposite -- thousands of package-builders, > tens of thousands of users, rebuilding their fusefs-smbnetfs for no reason > whatsoever. /That/ is bad user experience... >=20 > Considering, that no one has contacted me about adding this particular pa= tch > -- despite it being available on SourceForge for months -- I suspect rath= er > strongly, that it simply is not used with LIBSECRET by anyone... Or, if a > few people are actually building it with the option turned on, that's a > deliberate action and they are not trying to disable the feature through > configuration -- which disabling is now fixed by the new patch. The good thing is that it is not up to you to make up rules. The rule, clearly stated here https://www.freebsd.org/doc/en/books/porters-handbook/makefile-naming.html#= makefile-portrevision states that: 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. If something is not clear in that sentence, please tell me where and in what way so that I can make it more clear to understand. --=20 Mathieu Arnold --q4nwj7ty6yylwf5s Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQKTBAABCgB9FiEEOraXidLtEhBkQLpbOkUW81GDzkgFAl2a8A1fFIAAAAAALgAo aXNzdWVyLWZwckBub3RhdGlvbnMub3BlbnBncC5maWZ0aGhvcnNlbWFuLm5ldDNB QjY5Nzg5RDJFRDEyMTA2NDQwQkE1QjNBNDUxNkYzNTE4M0NFNDgACgkQOkUW81GD zkjKvA/+LhI2xdShT9SS0A7WMy9NAObjOZtSvt0bkty2nIAlV83lYixvczUuvOgP mcmrtIuOxH+1ZXXQ/rANvpaUxhva7m2S4gvoOTzwHKKrj2trVavCaf5KVeJqlsSG ccSAVC1If0WYpbTXttkW/vraf7xzIxiIufM+ezmz1CMJMW/8c1iP+Vm708r5LMIt MK62g1/sTaAEndKuejFx5TJb2iMV7MkZ08d36i5tvznsda1LTFp9dkrGrj8NAHPM 2FyEjyMiNPQqCNSI5Vh+61q0g3ipy1vqXK54i7C6VQyuvbZH7ZUxVkjkiVvFrdg7 dmCg70s9u9sH7pklr1FNKwkZSApAyXECNVMtzCdEkoC+QVbpGseiVsuHdf/sO8df ajzMTM1RntECaK+nszEFXk7bnaFodpg3z7cSqA11qSByBE+9MM//lrdEScuwo7hT u0WJZJn9gGbAibp3suJXyt46QmBcwQufk8uXd9+y9tcVEVH7hBsdR6VQ0SImZMaM iX1rLU6xn9Lp4aCkWP4ffWMv/XraffcB+jnnbVZATxw/OyHeqmHdvL8WsD222c8g jtDXGQ24UPI1CbyFKmRYaYFVQHU6YCj/AedVFC15POWwIVXuecUKL6TD3IfBDrM4 1LUXXdSpWDvVezTPPpLov3ozMwNkviQfsgy6IaACNe4adMBDwHY= =A0vL -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --q4nwj7ty6yylwf5s--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20191007075806.hwt3esdx5rrart37>