Date: Thu, 28 Sep 2017 10:01:16 -0600 From: Adam Weinberger <adamw@adamw.org> To: Stefan Esser <se@freebsd.org> Cc: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: [HEADUP] FLAVORS landing. Message-ID: <19197D28-916F-4E16-9B29-CCD685811DA2@adamw.org> In-Reply-To: <a5b2394e-3de7-e758-f059-121e187c824b@freebsd.org> References: <201709272057.v8RKvTem010871@gw.catspoiler.org> <a5b2394e-3de7-e758-f059-121e187c824b@freebsd.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> On 28 Sep, 2017, at 0:55, Stefan Esser <se@freebsd.org> wrote: >=20 > Am 27.09.17 um 22:57 schrieb Don Lewis: >> If at some point you run into a bug and need the debug files, you can >> pkg install the debug files for whatever packages that you need = without >> disturbing your already installed runtime files, and then you can = later >> deinstall the debug files when you are done with them without needing = to >> reinstall the runtime files. The same thing applies to docs. >=20 > This assumes, that a matching version of the debug files is still > available. Otherwise, you had to first install the latest version > of the package and to reproduce the situation with that version. >=20 > This may be seen as a feature (bug reports only for the version > currently in ports), but may be impractical in many cases. >=20 > The matching of versions of base package and sub-packages must be > more strict than by version number, since trivial changes might be > applied to a port without incrementing the PORTREVISION, but with > impact on the binary, e.g. if the port is to built with some gcc > version from ports and that gcc port has been updated, leading to > different object files and debug symbols than a previous version > of the port with identical version number. >=20 > A "build number" could be added to each (sub-)package and only if > this build number matches, a sub-package may be installed on top > of an already installed base package. The build time/date could of > course be used instead, if an identical value is used for all the > corresponding files. Build date/time or some other per-build identifier violates = reproducibility. We already require that PORTREVISION be bumped every time the resulting = package is changed. We already enforce it universally. Trivial changes, = by our definition, do not alter the resulting package in any meaningful = way (changing http to https in the pkg-descr file, improving LICENSE = information, etc.). GCC bump is not in any way a trivial change. When GCC is updated, ALL = gcc-dependent ports are bumped. # Adam --=20 Adam Weinberger adamw@adamw.org https://www.adamw.org
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?19197D28-916F-4E16-9B29-CCD685811DA2>