Date: Mon, 23 Mar 2009 23:14:13 +0000 From: David O'Brien <obrien@FreeBSD.ORG> To: Pav Lucistnik <pav@FreeBSD.org> Cc: cvs-ports@FreeBSD.org, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org, ports-committers@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: ports/shells/bash Makefile pkg-plist Message-ID: <20090323231412.GA94221@hub.freebsd.org> In-Reply-To: <49BA52D2.8090209@FreeBSD.org> References: <200903120954.n2C9s2ev063133@repoman.freebsd.org> <20090313023956.GA49511@dragon.NUXI.org> <49BA52D2.8090209@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Fri, Mar 13, 2009 at 01:34:26PM +0100, Pav Lucistnik wrote:
> David O'Brien wrote:
> >On Thu, Mar 12, 2009 at 09:54:01AM +0000, Sergey A. Osokin wrote:
> >>osa 2009-03-12 09:54:01 UTC
> >> FreeBSD ports repository
> >> Modified files:
> >> shells/bash Makefile pkg-plist
> >> Log:
> >> Fix pkg-plist.
> >> Bump PORTREVISION.
> >
> >Thanks for fixing the PLIST (much appreciated), but why did you bump
> >PORTREVISION for a PLIST change?
> >
> >There is zero reason to force a reinstall for a PLIST change. Either the
> >port is already installed (and the user can wait for some other reason to
> >update), or the port isn't installed and bumping PORTREVISION does
> >nothing.
>
> It's needed for package cluster, otherwise it does not know to rebuild
> and will serve incomplete package forever.
Is there ever a change then that doesn't require a bump in either
PORTREVISION or PORTVERSION?
If not, maybe we should do away with PORTREVISION and use something like:
${PORTNAME}-${PORTVERSION}_${VCS_ID}
That way the revision # would automatically be bumped with every commit.
--
-- David (obrien@FreeBSD.org)
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20090323231412.GA94221>