From owner-svn-ports-head@FreeBSD.ORG  Fri Dec  6 10:22:10 2013
Return-Path: <owner-svn-ports-head@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: svn-ports-head@freebsd.org
Received: by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix, from userid 1033)
 id AB7CBCC3; Fri,  6 Dec 2013 10:22:10 +0000 (UTC)
Date: Fri, 6 Dec 2013 10:22:10 +0000
From: Alexey Dokuchaev <danfe@FreeBSD.org>
To: Ganael LAPLANCHE <martymac@FreeBSD.org>
Subject: Re: svn commit: r335728 - head/benchmarks/bonnie++
Message-ID: <20131206102210.GA78375@FreeBSD.org>
References: <201312060950.rB69opsI095759@svn.freebsd.org>
 <20131206095801.GA72543@FreeBSD.org>
 <20131206095855.GB72543@FreeBSD.org>
 <20131206100547.M75091@FreeBSD.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20131206100547.M75091@FreeBSD.org>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.22 (2013-10-16)
Cc: svn-ports-head@freebsd.org, svn-ports-all@freebsd.org,
 ports-committers@freebsd.org
X-BeenThere: svn-ports-head@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: SVN commit messages for the ports tree for head
 <svn-ports-head.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/options/svn-ports-head>,
 <mailto:svn-ports-head-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/svn-ports-head/>
List-Post: <mailto:svn-ports-head@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:svn-ports-head-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/svn-ports-head>,
 <mailto:svn-ports-head-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 06 Dec 2013 10:22:10 -0000

On Fri, Dec 06, 2013 at 10:10:34AM +0000, Ganael LAPLANCHE wrote:
> On Fri, 6 Dec 2013 09:58:55 +0000, Alexey Dokuchaev wrote
> > Although I don't see the reason for PORTREVISION bump...
> 
> Depending on an older version of GCC (by using 'any' version) will
> probably lead to different binaries produced, so to a different package
> content. Do you think it's overkill to bump the revision for that reason ?

Since these bit-stirring changes inside the binary are hardly user-visible,
yes, I think it was an overkill.  But it does not hurt, of course.  I just
do not like to rebuild things for no real reason.  I mean, if user is happy
with installed package (built with gcc46), why force him/her to rebuilt it
just for the sake of using different compiler?

./danfe