Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2006 05:24:07 -0800 From: Ade Lovett <ade@FreeBSD.org> To: Alexander Leidinger <Alexander@Leidinger.net> Cc: cvs-ports@FreeBSD.org, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org, Ade Lovett <ade@FreeBSD.org>, ports-committers@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: ports/Mk bsd.autotools.mk Message-ID: <2FC5B77C-D64B-450A-BE27-1D5F71398AF4@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <20060223134503.7f4ef8d1@Magellan.Leidinger.net> References: <200602231043.k1NAhYlr080084@repoman.freebsd.org> <20060223125019.3f01dfd2@Magellan.Leidinger.net> <159128AC-0A32-474E-9B9A-8EC8EFBEAF14@FreeBSD.org> <20060223134503.7f4ef8d1@Magellan.Leidinger.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Feb 23, 2006, at 04:45 , Alexander Leidinger wrote: > According to cvsweb the revision for graphics/chbg wasn't bumped, so I > don't expect it to work. Well, herein lies the problem. This is a *wide* ranging commit, and as such, there is no way to please everybody. It's also a non- trivial problem to identify which of the 14000+ ports we have need to have bumps due to implicit dependencies. Note that using portupgrade incrementally won't actually break anything, since it makes extensive use of /usr/local/lib/compat/pkg. Of course, we could have used a sledgehammer, and bumped *everything*, but that seemed to be needless. Please also note the timing of this patch, just before not one, but two, -RELEASES. A large proportion of our userbase simply loads up discs in their CD/DVD drive, and install the packages associated with that release. As with any major change, there will always be edge cases, and I'm sure my inbox will fill up with tales of woe over the coming days and weeks. With the de-facto standard of handling source (as opposed to package) upgrades, the *only* response that will guarantee some semblance of normality is: portupgrade -af -aDe
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?2FC5B77C-D64B-450A-BE27-1D5F71398AF4>