From owner-cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Feb 19 20:39:42 2012 Return-Path: Delivered-To: cvs-all@FreeBSD.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 04E8D106564A; Sun, 19 Feb 2012 20:39:42 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from sahil@tandon.net) Received: from cricket.hamla.org (cricket.hamla.org [206.251.255.31]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D70E78FC0A; Sun, 19 Feb 2012 20:39:41 +0000 (UTC) Received: from magic.hamla.org (cpe-68-174-92-20.nyc.res.rr.com [68.174.92.20]) by cricket.hamla.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id E16048A058; Sun, 19 Feb 2012 15:39:40 -0500 (EST) Date: Sun, 19 Feb 2012 15:39:38 -0500 From: Sahil Tandon To: Alexey Dokuchaev Message-ID: <20120219203937.GA6943@magic.hamla.org> References: <201202182356.q1INuU7V061378@repoman.freebsd.org> <20120219060053.GA45762@FreeBSD.org> <20120219150943.GA6673@magic.hamla.org> <20120219164528.GA48166@FreeBSD.org> <20120219175645.GA6833@magic.hamla.org> <20120219191106.GA71541@FreeBSD.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20120219191106.GA71541@FreeBSD.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) X-Virus-Scanned: clamav-milter 0.97.3 at cricket.hamla.org X-Virus-Status: Clean Cc: cvs-ports@FreeBSD.org, Eitan Adler , cvs-all@FreeBSD.org, ports-committers@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: ports/devel/adime Makefile ports/x11-wm/icewm Makefile ports/graphics/scr2png Makefile ports/x11/xbindkeys Makefile X-BeenThere: cvs-all@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list Reply-To: cvs-ports@FreeBSD.org List-Id: **OBSOLETE** CVS commit messages for the entire tree List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 19 Feb 2012 20:39:42 -0000 On Sun, 2012-02-19 at 19:11:06 +0000, Alexey Dokuchaev wrote: > ... > > > Technically, since there is no supporting infrastructure to > > > ensure if some app really requires particular shlib version or > > > not (and I personally do not see how it can be implemented > > > automatically for any arbitrary port out there), the whole issue > > > right now is little more than a matter of personal preference. > > > > Emphasis on 'personal preference'. > > No sure I quite understand what do you mean. Perhaps you could > elaborate? I am not sure why you could not parse the above. You already acknowledged that the issue is "little more than a matter of personal preference." > So far it seems that my assessments are not being counterargued with > valid technical points and facts. Let me point you, once again, to the thread on freebsd-ports in which arguments have already been made against specifying library numbers in LIB_DEPENDS. For me, mi@ and dougb@'s arguments are more compelling than yours. -- Sahil Tandon