From owner-svn-ports-all@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Jul 16 12:46:03 2014 Return-Path: Delivered-To: svn-ports-all@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AD1E03E7; Wed, 16 Jul 2014 12:46:03 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-wg0-x22c.google.com (mail-wg0-x22c.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c00::22c]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com", Issuer "Google Internet Authority G2" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3237B23F5; Wed, 16 Jul 2014 12:46:02 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-wg0-f44.google.com with SMTP id m15so862688wgh.15 for ; Wed, 16 Jul 2014 05:46:00 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=sender:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-type:content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=blLtwEsdeygzlEtDAgbIslovf0HmFCMSwjAtA18g0tY=; b=0iyrDqZ+uwF+cSbFnzmUqNrFWTsmu9ulXiqX5gLewMvTDtgDvneZtCBNUypsAsPDPY awpCeuKAAlxedou9rygZkTLYFPEMuO8syCqrMv+Hfex24B6U+3z/euMQ9YNe75a1YHsv CXLr3e0pxo9C2tJEYLaF0BL4sOYQeZRThkQ4O3QRlcqpt3E61v8QtPwJs2sfalzf3a3m vr7HZj7BKxdckrz05BQ53Ct7tG2N/yEZCZQqBrXD1TBUbqOhpfyJqXwhLQV1yqQXVnbj Zeu/mWKiOFBf97mVJvJx+ZWNieeEjnZr2Ty5XItmfAnYw5mYIXh+S8vMw0iog9gFfV3s SPAA== X-Received: by 10.180.90.233 with SMTP id bz9mr13238302wib.42.1405514760339; Wed, 16 Jul 2014 05:46:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ivaldir.etoilebsd.net ([2001:41d0:8:db4c::1]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id du6sm8703850wib.6.2014.07.16.05.45.58 for (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Wed, 16 Jul 2014 05:45:59 -0700 (PDT) Sender: Baptiste Daroussin Date: Wed, 16 Jul 2014 14:45:57 +0200 From: Baptiste Daroussin To: Alexey Dokuchaev Subject: Re: svn commit: r361646 - in head/net/samba36: . files Message-ID: <20140716124557.GM48710@ivaldir.etoilebsd.net> References: <53C5618F.2020104@FreeBSD.org> <20140716094453.GA53961@FreeBSD.org> <53C65677.8060603@FreeBSD.org> <20140716111328.GB82901@FreeBSD.org> <53C6638E.6000801@FreeBSD.org> <20140716115304.GA5861@FreeBSD.org> <53C668C9.9030209@FreeBSD.org> <20140716120705.GA14729@FreeBSD.org> <53C66C3B.1000905@FreeBSD.org> <20140716124326.GA26506@FreeBSD.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="VnOTrGv5LmZxna7m" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20140716124326.GA26506@FreeBSD.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12) Cc: svn-ports-head , Vsevolod Stakhov , "Timur I. Bakeyev" , Steve Wills , svn-ports-all , marino@freebsd.org, "ports-committers@freebsd.org" X-BeenThere: svn-ports-all@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: SVN commit messages for the ports tree List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 16 Jul 2014 12:46:03 -0000 --VnOTrGv5LmZxna7m Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Wed, Jul 16, 2014 at 12:43:26PM +0000, Alexey Dokuchaev wrote: > On Wed, Jul 16, 2014 at 01:12:43PM +0100, Vsevolod Stakhov wrote: > > Then we would have different packages with the same version. And pkg > > will not perform an upgrade. Nontheless, in the current scheme, we take > > unnecessary fields, such as licenses or comments, into consideration. >=20 > About the "different packages with the same version" -- but aren't you > trying to come up with more fine-grained criteria for pkg to understand > if it's time to upgrade, not just look at version/revision/epoch? (Or > perhaps I'm just understanding "same version" wrongly in this context.) >=20 > > Moreover, manifest cannot rely on svn, so if you take a look on some > > manifest generated from a port you could figure out what fields are >=20 > I would say that pkg(8) cannot rely on svn (and that's natural), but we > can insert last change rev into +MANIFEST when generating it, no? So > it will just become another field akin to version and revision. >=20 > > likely important and what fields are just meaningless. I'd like to > > remind that my current set is the following: > >=20 > > * maintainer > > * www > > * message > > * comment >=20 > I agree with Michael here; these four fields IMHO should be dropped from > consideration (irregardless of if svn rev can/will be embedded or not). >=20 > ./danfe >=20 > P.S. About that +MANIFEST file: can we please please please make it > human readable? Like, break the lines, use indentation, etc. Maybe it > is more appropriate to keep +COMPACT_MANIFEST as one-liner, although I > am not convinced that separate +COMPACT_MANIFEST should exist at all. >=20 If you want a human readable version uses the -R options from pkg info/sear= ch The one inside the tar file is not made to be human readable :) regards, Bapt --VnOTrGv5LmZxna7m Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2 iEYEARECAAYFAlPGdAUACgkQ8kTtMUmk6ExrfwCghvXTtjA+bQE+0tYHBMtxgq12 hEYAmgPkxjLBAWrs5ry2ikk5AU/yxcMy =N51H -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --VnOTrGv5LmZxna7m--