Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2002 20:43:09 -0500 (EST) From: Mikhail Teterin <mi@aldan.algebra.com> To: tadayuki@mediaone.net Cc: tadayuki.okada@windriver.com, will@csociety.org, ports@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: ports/graphics/gd Makefile pkg-comment Message-ID: <200201240143.g0O1hCQ79958@aldan.algebra.com> In-Reply-To: <20020123194311.0a620a5a.tadayuki@mediaone.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 23 Jan, Tadayuki OKADA wrote: > I said: >> I meant: >> If port A depends on port B's library. >> port B updated. Assume it breaks binary compatibility. >> port A build will not be broken, so forget PORTREVISION bump. >> People update port B, but not port A. so port A will stop working. > The situation is: > port A was built with previous version of port B. Then port B is > updated. pkg_version or portversion detect new version of port B. So > peolple update port B. The reason port A needs upgrading should not be the PORTREVISON somewhere, but the mere fact, that port B, for which there is a lib-dependency, is being upgraded. If portupgrade does not do this, it should -- always -- with or without my modifications. > But port A will not be detected, because PORTREVISON is same. None of the "chase the foo shared library bump" commits I've seen so far bump up PORTREVISION at the same time. Or do they? -mi To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-ports" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200201240143.g0O1hCQ79958>