From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Oct 15 21:18:05 2005 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2C5AB16A41F for ; Sat, 15 Oct 2005 21:18:05 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from petermatulis@yahoo.ca) Received: from web60017.mail.yahoo.com (web60017.mail.yahoo.com [209.73.178.65]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with SMTP id AD67243D4C for ; Sat, 15 Oct 2005 21:18:04 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from petermatulis@yahoo.ca) Received: (qmail 49220 invoked by uid 60001); 15 Oct 2005 21:18:04 -0000 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.ca; h=Message-ID:Received:Date:From:Subject:To:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; b=ezav/wSh57/XEt+CFhIzUZfHtgzv8C0f0jGfKj0kWorKTjXlKbKXCpipcVZJtmSZgsLRc+ENt2sNe6S5ALJZqZj9AiJAfQH+sS72fQxulnYBwsndCw3+lxjlAlYHaMJFVj8W/HsUf/jxvvegDFOTih5RJ2ges8Hopr5M1MWj8Gc= ; Message-ID: <20051015211804.49218.qmail@web60017.mail.yahoo.com> Received: from [216.252.84.12] by web60017.mail.yahoo.com via HTTP; Sat, 15 Oct 2005 17:18:03 EDT Date: Sat, 15 Oct 2005 17:18:03 -0400 (EDT) From: Peter Matulis To: 'freebsd-questions' In-Reply-To: <003801c5d1ca$637c59e0$0101a8c0@petenet.britersen.co.uk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Subject: RE: portupgrade -ar (why?) X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 15 Oct 2005 21:18:05 -0000 --- Petersen wrote: > > But still, a port requires upgrading or it does not. Using 'r', > > portupgrade ultimately checks whether some port should be > upgraded. > > Are you saying that the 'r' switch involves a different decision > > making process than 'a'? > > > > The -a switch will upgrade a port only if its version number has > increased (as you know). > > The -r switch will upgrade a port if one of its dependancies has > been > upgraded, regardless of whether its version number has changed or > not. > > e.g. > > Appbar-1.0 depends on libfoo-1.0. Libfoo gets a portbump to 1.1. > portupgrade -r libfoo will install libfoo-1.1, plus also force a > recompile and reinstallation of appbar-1.0, irrespective of the > fact > that appbar's version remains the same. Thus, any ABI changes that > happened in libfoo that could potentially break appbar that was > compiled/linked against the previous version are limited. > > In an ideal world, this wouldn't be a problem. ABIs and APIs > should remain constant, until a library revision bump (i.e., if > libfoo.1's ABI changed and broke apps, it shoulda been bumped to libfoo.2). > Most times you can get away with not recompiling a port's dependants > because developers, but if you don't then it can shoot you in the foot > (read the recent list archives regarding openssl-0.9.8 to see an example of > this). Thank you very much (BTW, there is something missing in your last sentence). One last thing. Is this the case with the 'R' switch as well? __________________________________________________________ Find your next car at http://autos.yahoo.ca