Date: Tue, 24 Mar 2009 10:40:32 +0000 From: Alexey Dokuchaev <danfe@FreeBSD.org> To: Doug Barton <dougb@FreeBSD.org> Cc: cvs-ports@FreeBSD.org, Wesley Shields <wxs@FreeBSD.org>, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org, ports-committers@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: ports/net-im/libpurple Makefile Message-ID: <20090324104032.GA47617@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <49C84339.60201@FreeBSD.org> References: <200903240023.n2O0NVBb013624@repoman.freebsd.org> <49C84088.9020505@FreeBSD.org> <20090324021518.GC1292@atarininja.org> <49C84339.60201@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, Mar 23, 2009 at 07:19:37PM -0700, Doug Barton wrote: > Wesley Shields wrote: > > On Mon, Mar 23, 2009 at 07:08:08PM -0700, Doug Barton wrote: > >> Since silc is off by default (and therefore the package won't change), > >> was this necessary? > > > > There are two viewpoints to this: > > > > 1) The option is off by default so the package won't change, and thus > > PORTREVISION doesn't need to be bumped. > > > > 2) Not bumping PORTREVISION may cause the port to misbehave if it's > > built with old libraries. > > I don't see the logic in this. The port works just fine right now with > the old libraries. Can you be more specific about the scenario you're > concerned about? Per what I see, shlib version of libsilcclient was bumped during devel/silc-toolkit update. Since net-im/libpurple explicitly depends on named library, PORTREVISION bump is in order, since API could have changed (thus the shlib version bump). If silc-toolkit update was merely a bugfix one, and shlib version retained, PORTREVISION should be left intact. ./danfe
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20090324104032.GA47617>