From owner-freebsd-pkg@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Jan 8 11:35:53 2015 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-pkg@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [8.8.178.115]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 925DA784 for ; Thu, 8 Jan 2015 11:35:53 +0000 (UTC) Received: from eu1sys200aog134.obsmtp.com (eu1sys200aog134.obsmtp.com [207.126.144.211]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CE7F91E4 for ; Thu, 8 Jan 2015 11:35:52 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-we0-f174.google.com ([74.125.82.174]) (using TLSv1) by eu1sys200aob134.postini.com ([207.126.147.11]) with SMTP ID DSNKVK5rkfMjaVfcHk382t1IV1kD6OzCrJF9@postini.com; Thu, 08 Jan 2015 11:35:52 UTC Received: by mail-we0-f174.google.com with SMTP id k48so1953918wev.5 for ; Thu, 08 Jan 2015 03:35:45 -0800 (PST) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:message-id:to:subject:cc:reply-to :in-reply-to; bh=qIlmRyNUZOM1Kx43ckZLMaYLfT7euMF6GDHenG5e3y4=; b=lLAbq0iI6/8hI3SfLWtI2i/g8UztEH3Bg0XdXLoaOx6QknZW9uiNVOoCvTuaWb6yuz oSo8GYqj0EozqJUOu1fpSoetMvai5EYO0kW+FROT9uAM71oiJnIAdzlRgrKxz6MAhGyL oV14FsWA6WFZs5VIDEichPTsEAiatFFL5boA2Pa9X1lUfToymt8wj/6/vSjOxRGeSmqG TFC3U3R/ndpNxzUAd1D7iMIOrQapBdIAfyUtbDpp0SFLs0P07gzrzmkR1HoYmf1rYPl+ kFF0MWABh++C7xT8QxTHMhzhUk+sEwPuMSNvAgU4tu2xCgPJM6453J+C4B5uurW42cNL o0IQ== X-Received: by 10.194.90.81 with SMTP id bu17mr17452078wjb.3.1420713440728; Thu, 08 Jan 2015 02:37:20 -0800 (PST) X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQlV1pViHbUS6sL7NfsgH/tizgox0gd3IfijXV8ushanQosd/pbw/bDcGOFwkU1mMXumhSWBgb9O/Pw3tC4aqy2P5G2SODOIiBwowIwcWblf+9nLeKGzJIovvjyL7qMjnkDU6qqNCXFrpBwSn/+xrPtCGXzkew== X-Received: by 10.194.90.81 with SMTP id bu17mr17452062wjb.3.1420713440615; Thu, 08 Jan 2015 02:37:20 -0800 (PST) Received: from mech-as221.men.bris.ac.uk (mech-as221.men.bris.ac.uk. [137.222.187.221]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id u13sm5581181wjr.26.2015.01.08.02.37.19 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Thu, 08 Jan 2015 02:37:19 -0800 (PST) Date: Thu, 08 Jan 2015 02:37:19 -0800 (PST) X-Google-Original-Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2015 10:37:18 GMT Received: from mech-as221.men.bris.ac.uk (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mech-as221.men.bris.ac.uk (8.14.9/8.14.9) with ESMTP id t08AbI41010452 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO); Thu, 8 Jan 2015 10:37:18 GMT (envelope-from mexas@mech-as221.men.bris.ac.uk) Received: (from mexas@localhost) by mech-as221.men.bris.ac.uk (8.14.9/8.14.9/Submit) id t08AbICF010451; Thu, 8 Jan 2015 10:37:18 GMT (envelope-from mexas) From: Anton Shterenlikht Message-Id: <201501081037.t08AbICF010451@mech-as221.men.bris.ac.uk> To: mexas@bris.ac.uk, woodsb02@gmail.com Subject: Re: official amd64 pkg repo: need to rebuild paraview for png-1.6.16 Reply-To: mexas@bris.ac.uk In-Reply-To: Cc: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org, freebsd-pkg@freebsd.org X-BeenThere: freebsd-pkg@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18-1 Precedence: list List-Id: Binary package management and package tools discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 08 Jan 2015 11:35:53 -0000 >From woodsb02@gmail.com Thu Jan 8 10:30:49 2015 > >The port revision was bumped on Christmas Day for the png version update. >However new packages are not available as the paraview port fails to build. > >It was marked as broken on 19th December: >http://www.freshports.org/science/paraview As I mentioned in another post, this is a situation that pkgng was promised to detect and avoid. The correct course of action is to warn the user that after "pkg upgrade" some installed packages will no longer work. The whole point of pkgng is increased trust. If I have to manually check before each pkg upgrade what will happen to all my installed packages, then what is the point of a sophisticated tool like pkgng. Or, if I have to manually roll back the ports tree selectively and rebuild old versions of problem ports, like png in this example, then again, what is the point of pkgng. I don't want to sound too critical. Up to now I've been very happy with pkg capabilities. I'm just surprised at today's behaviour. Anton