Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2012 10:08:09 +0100 From: Alex Dupre <ale@FreeBSD.org> To: Kevin Oberman <kob6558@gmail.com> Cc: ports@freebsd.org, RW <rwmaillists@googlemail.com> Subject: Re: [RFC/HEADSUP] portmaster default -w (preserve shared libraries) Message-ID: <50C84979.2070505@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <CAN6yY1uPJgfkTpFuXSHECi0xM49-BR-KiGn=Y0usuMMCJK0f=Q@mail.gmail.com> References: <50C7576C.5040100@FreeBSD.org> <CA%2B7WWScXnLqW=5kuG9_1Tj6aYptUJeUQY-64zzvTtEGVcVK9Cg@mail.gmail.com> <CADLFtte=_oGVySzkUP%2BqSMHa=qU4k2uMZMA01ESgfYnEkunKdg@mail.gmail.com> <50C762C4.9080302@FreeBSD.org> <CADLo838vaR2bXme4bFC=toFagL0--2F0vjCi61Fr_RYMixkRsw@mail.gmail.com> <50C7871B.9030706@FreeBSD.org> <20121211210446.15c3f2be@gumby.homeunix.com> <CAN6yY1uPJgfkTpFuXSHECi0xM49-BR-KiGn=Y0usuMMCJK0f=Q@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Kevin Oberman ha scritto: >> The main reason for keeping the libraries is that it reduces the >> number of breakages during the upgrade process, which can be a very >> serious inconvenience, particularly if the forced update fails to >> complete. In my experience the problem you describe is much less >> significant. > > It does eliminate the instant breakage of lots and lots of stuff, but > it can lead to hard to track down issues later. Exactly. Moreover the pcre version bump was not necessary, we created a problem where it wasn't. I'd say that when there are shared library bumps the commits should be checked and reviewed by multiple eyes. -- Alex Dupre
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?50C84979.2070505>