Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Fri, 5 Jun 2009 20:23:13 +0300
From:      Ion-Mihai Tetcu <itetcu@FreeBSD.org>
To:        Gabor Kovesdan <gabor@FreeBSD.org>
Cc:        Gabor Pali <pgj@FreeBSD.org>, cvs-ports@FreeBSD.org, Doug Barton <dougb@FreeBSD.org>, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org, ports-committers@FreeBSD.org
Subject:   Re: cvs commit: ports/devel/hs-alex Makefile
Message-ID:  <20090605202313.686a6929@it.buh.tecnik93.com>
In-Reply-To: <4A29493F.7030004@FreeBSD.org>
References:  <200906051159.n55BxGPw078489@repoman.freebsd.org> <4A29485C.3060504@FreeBSD.org> <4A29493F.7030004@FreeBSD.org>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--Sig_/JR9/ebXSpDbWG_IHn.+JBZt
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Fri, 05 Jun 2009 18:35:11 +0200
Gabor Kovesdan <gabor@FreeBSD.org> wrote:

> Doug Barton escribi=C3=B3:
> > Gabor Pali wrote:
> >  =20
> >> pgj         2009-06-05 11:59:16 UTC
> >>
> >>   FreeBSD ports repository
> >>
> >>   Modified files:
> >>     devel/hs-alex        Makefile=20
> >>   Log:
> >>   - Respect custom PREFIX, LOCALBASE
> >>   - Bump port revision
> >>  =20
> >>   Reported by:    QAT
> >>   Approved by:    gabor (mentor)
> >>  =20
> >>   Revision  Changes    Path
> >>   1.27      +7 -0      ports/devel/hs-alex/Makefile
> >>
> >> http://www.FreeBSD.org/cgi/cvsweb.cgi/ports/devel/hs-alex/Makefile.dif=
f?&r1=3D1.26&r2=3D1.27&f=3Dh
> >>
> >>    =20
> >
> > I can't see any reason for a PORTREVISION bump here. Kudos for
> > fixing this issue, but if we do bumps for every time nothing but
> > this is fixed our users are going to be doing a lot of needless
> > recompiles for no benefit.
> >  =20
> As approver, I also thought about this but some people might use a=20
> different PREFIX/LOCALBASE configuration constantly and in this case
> a rebuild is necessary to get this port installed correctly. I don't
> think using custom PREFIX/LOCALBASE is widespread but theoretically
> it is possible that there are such people.

The bump was not needed here since the port didn't build at all with
custom LOCALBASE/PREFIX. Since it didn't build it couldn't have been
installed or packaged, so no need to bump.

In the general case I think we should bump PORTREVISION when fixing
something, even for non-default configurations since there's no other
way for a user to know to upgrade. Some disagree.

--=20
IOnut - Un^d^dregistered ;) FreeBSD "user"
  "Intellectual Property" is   nowhere near as valuable   as "Intellect"
FreeBSD committer -> itetcu@FreeBSD.org, PGP Key ID 057E9F8B493A297B

--Sig_/JR9/ebXSpDbWG_IHn.+JBZt
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc
Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=signature.asc

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.11 (FreeBSD)

iEYEARECAAYFAkopVIMACgkQJ7GIuiH/oeWqZwCfYXHZpLjlexKgIulrsefjoma2
E2wAmwU+n1y1ZCa9eZh7rKGr7iSjicOm
=xmpC
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--Sig_/JR9/ebXSpDbWG_IHn.+JBZt--



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20090605202313.686a6929>