Date: Mon, 05 Jan 2009 17:37:50 -0800 From: Xin LI <delphij@delphij.net> To: Jan Henrik Sylvester <me@janh.de> Cc: Xin Li <delphij@FreeBSD.org>, ports-list freebsd <freebsd-ports@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: OpenLDAP induced PORTREVISION bumps Message-ID: <4962B5EE.3080401@delphij.net> In-Reply-To: <4962A362.9010304@janh.de> References: <4962A362.9010304@janh.de>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Hi, Jan Henrik Sylvester wrote: > I just face many large ports requiring updates, although mine depend on > openldap23-client, which have not been updated. Thus, I decided to > investigate changing openldap23-client to openldap24-client. > > According to 'libchk -v', only 10 of 29 of my ports bumped actually link > to one of the openldap libraries. (For example kdesdk3 does not link to > it.) Do I miss something? Why have all these ports been bumped? > > devel/gconf2 did not get bumped, although it automatically picks up the > dependency if openldap*-client is installed, which probably affects many > people. Why? Because it does not affect the default package? That's a good question. In practice we bump PORTREVISION by parsing the INDEX file which indicates the dependency relationship from package build environment. This way is effective if ports does not do things like devel/gconf2 which picks up dependencies that has been installed, as compared to doing 'grep WITH_LDAP */*/Makefile' or something similar, as dependencies can be represented in different ways. My (personal) opinion is that PORTREVISION should not be done at all and the task of rebuilding depending ports should be done by more automated tools, however currently our ports infrastructure is lacking of more finer grained dependency describing information store that can act as hint to port tools to make correct decisions :( > If I update openldap23-client to openldap24-client, is it advisable to > rebuild all packages depending on it (81) or just the 29 that got bumped > plus gconf2? (According to UPDATING, it probably should be all. > According to 'libchk -v', 10+1 should be enough.) Some ports tools can keep old shared libraries into /usr/local/lib/compat/; this way is likely to cause some problem in the future if you mix different versions so it's advisable to rebuild *all* packages that depends on it (81). Cheers, - -- Xin LI <delphij@delphij.net> http://www.delphij.net/ FreeBSD - The Power to Serve! -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.9 (FreeBSD) iEYEARECAAYFAklite0ACgkQi+vbBBjt66ClAACeIhsPUT8qGHVopcD0QoAJUAPZ a0IAoMEZ4xAIAbfZ6Rr+L76EkLpWFk3F =iXdM -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4962B5EE.3080401>