From owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Apr 14 19:09:22 2010 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 511341065678 for ; Wed, 14 Apr 2010 19:09:22 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from fjwcash@gmail.com) Received: from mail-gy0-f182.google.com (mail-gy0-f182.google.com [209.85.160.182]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 068078FC16 for ; Wed, 14 Apr 2010 19:09:21 +0000 (UTC) Received: by gyh20 with SMTP id 20so214355gyh.13 for ; Wed, 14 Apr 2010 12:09:21 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:in-reply-to:references :date:received:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; bh=+0jxQ4MxYPxa40AHws0rBxjI1s5yLQTr/7Lb4gKqmyg=; b=nvyGrA850fp/sBXylTm/FPTykEr7vLtTmS4BWBrnxgGuQM1uZ17qmObbZQQjN9LFo5 en+tzVHiZKAd87ht1/u7y1QCA6EH6LQJlg9OFDEn4jHgKnULVZDbTWFBiRUTcjxE9G1f /RsDu8bylA9C3XS3/otvvGXw6Y6y5WHwgAje0= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type; b=jER6R5xbZdZngRtDdqfA0jRy2vjPndgLCRbUB/nkGz9xkA5opO5SWzfZXCDKX/xlce PRJT3Wa9La+SnLTnvk728gXoGTDsfBGlV8C7VFA9nwsox8vA92ELdb/O77J+HpooczeC meoOc9YJBrfHCMk8FWDU738xnyKdqwe9IcHzk= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.231.14.76 with HTTP; Wed, 14 Apr 2010 12:09:20 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <20100414174853.GC43908@dan.emsphone.com> Date: Wed, 14 Apr 2010 12:09:20 -0700 Received: by 10.231.159.198 with SMTP id k6mr3450219ibx.92.1271272161091; Wed, 14 Apr 2010 12:09:21 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: From: Freddie Cash To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.5 Subject: Re: there is a way to avoid strict libraries linking? X-BeenThere: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Technical Discussions relating to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 14 Apr 2010 19:09:22 -0000 On Wed, Apr 14, 2010 at 12:02 PM, Leinier Cruz Salfran < salfrancl.listas@gmail.com> wrote: > On Wed, Apr 14, 2010 at 2:50 PM, Freddie Cash wrote: > > The port maintainer doesn't *have to* update anything. When library > ports > > go through a library bump like this, all the ports that depend on it get > an > > automatic PORTREVISION bump. > > okey maybe i didn't understood the 'bump' means .. I must to thank you > because of comment about this subject > > > All the port maintainer has to do is double-check that the port compiles > > with the new version of the lib. Only if there are issues with that > (which > > usually get picked up by the -exp runs on the ports cluster), then the > port > > maintainer has to step in and fix things. > > okey let me see if I understood you .. you mean that I create a > 'ONE_PORT' to a specific program version and if one of the library on > which the 'ONE_PORT' depends change to a major version, then the > 'ports cluster' put add PORTREVISION to the 'ONE_PORT' and update the > *_DEPENDS automatically???????? Correct. The PORTVERSION doesn't change. But PORTREVISION gets bumped up by 1. That way, when user's check for updates in the ports tree, via "pkg_version -vl '<'" or "portversion -v" or similar tools, then ONE_PORT will be listed as "update available" like so (not exact syntax, going from memory): one_port-1.0.0 <= needs update (port has one_port-1.0.0_1) The _1 part is PORTREVISION. It's used to say "the version hasn't changed, but something in the ports tree requires this to be re-installed or 'upgraded'". Maybe an OPTIONS line was added, or a dependent library version changed, or a build dependency changed, or a new RC script was added, or something like that. There's some good examples/explanations of PORTREVISION in the FreeBSD Porter's Handbook. -- Freddie Cash fjwcash@gmail.com