Date: Mon, 24 Dec 2012 11:07:45 -0500 From: Eitan Adler <lists@eitanadler.com> To: Miroslav Lachman <000.fbsd@quip.cz> Cc: Chris Rees <crees@freebsd.org>, Royce Williams <royce@tycho.org>, FreeBSD Mailing List <freebsd-ports@freebsd.org>, Chris Whitehouse <cwhiteh@onetel.com> Subject: Re: UPDATING Message-ID: <CAF6rxg=d35cHx-hf9xAEvb8HHHGuFuG0xCfkhYXEWy1-4VVoqA@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <50D87096.2060306@quip.cz> References: <2056641356295776@web16h.yandex.ru> <CAEAhP2gLYXHwe4yUDjOSDqGJwXcxUHfya2X6Hv7EE7y2LmqsLg@mail.gmail.com> <50D83D0A.3030105@onetel.com> <CADLo839UR%2BNAO51RvG-rFi_cNOg4B8E-ePtFnognOn_SSDndPg@mail.gmail.com> <CA%2BE3k935oeY3C5YLv=NTKh_e6Fi=j2bvHKRGyg5TM7-CLZD%2BmA@mail.gmail.com> <50D87096.2060306@quip.cz>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 24 December 2012 10:11, Miroslav Lachman <000.fbsd@quip.cz> wrote: > In addition, ACTION: REBUILD_DEPS can be parsable by ports management tools > and automatically handled. > Rebuild deps is the mostly used information in UPDATING so it can be > seamlessly handled by ports tools. UPDATING can't be handled automatically for a variety of reasons. Imagine a port gets updated from 1.0 to 2.0 and then from 2.0 to 2.1. If 1.0->2.0 requires the rebuild there is no indication that 2.0->2.1 doesn't. That said, I do think that figuring out a format that *could* be automatically parsed is a good thing. -- Eitan Adler
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CAF6rxg=d35cHx-hf9xAEvb8HHHGuFuG0xCfkhYXEWy1-4VVoqA>