Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2002 23:17:49 -0500 From: Tadayuki OKADA <tadayuki@mediaone.net> To: Mikhail Teterin <mi@aldan.algebra.com> Cc: Alexander@Leidinger.net, tadayuki.okada@windriver.com, will@csociety.org, freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: cvs commit: ports/graphics/gd Makefile pkg-comment Message-ID: <20020131231749.7515b9eb.tadayuki@mediaone.net> In-Reply-To: <200202010313.g113DOQ26744@aldan.algebra.com> References: <20020130230915.4cf23442.tadayuki@mediaone.net> <200202010313.g113DOQ26744@aldan.algebra.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
I already gave up. But I need to clarify one point. On Thu, 31 Jan 2002 22:13:21 -0500 (EST) Mikhail Teterin <mi@aldan.algebra.com> wrote: > >> My proposal has even less to do with _packages_ -- it only affects > >> the ports-building. > > If you don't bump port A's PORTREVISION when libB.so's major version > > is bumped, we'll have several packages which have exactly same version > > including PORTREVISION, but their binaries are different. > > Who is "we"? Bento? > > > Porter's Handbook demands you to bump PORTREVISION when the package's > > binary is changed. > > Right -- assuming the default (read -- Bento) environment. And it is not > changing, since Bento builds packages anew from scratch. I'm talking about when libB.so's major version is bumped. There is already a package built on bento which depends on old version of libB.so., and it's already used by many users. And now libB.so's version is bumped, there's another package built on *bento* which depends on new libB.so, but that package has exactly same version-revision with previous one. A user can't tell if his package is latest or not by looking at the package version. -- Tadayuki OKADA 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?20020131231749.7515b9eb.tadayuki>