From owner-cvs-ports@FreeBSD.ORG  Tue Mar 24 10:40:32 2009
Return-Path: <owner-cvs-ports@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: cvs-ports@FreeBSD.org
Received: by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix, from userid 1033)
	id 62FD91065674; Tue, 24 Mar 2009 10:40:32 +0000 (UTC)
Date: Tue, 24 Mar 2009 10:40:32 +0000
From: Alexey Dokuchaev <danfe@FreeBSD.org>
To: Doug Barton <dougb@FreeBSD.org>
Message-ID: <20090324104032.GA47617@FreeBSD.org>
References: <200903240023.n2O0NVBb013624@repoman.freebsd.org>
	<49C84088.9020505@FreeBSD.org>
	<20090324021518.GC1292@atarininja.org> <49C84339.60201@FreeBSD.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=koi8-r
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <49C84339.60201@FreeBSD.org>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.1i
Cc: cvs-ports@FreeBSD.org, Wesley Shields <wxs@FreeBSD.org>,
	cvs-all@FreeBSD.org, ports-committers@FreeBSD.org
Subject: Re: cvs commit: ports/net-im/libpurple Makefile
X-BeenThere: cvs-ports@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: CVS commit messages for the ports tree <cvs-ports.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/cvs-ports>,
	<mailto:cvs-ports-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/cvs-ports>
List-Post: <mailto:cvs-ports@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:cvs-ports-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/cvs-ports>,
	<mailto:cvs-ports-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 24 Mar 2009 10:40:33 -0000

On Mon, Mar 23, 2009 at 07:19:37PM -0700, Doug Barton wrote:
> Wesley Shields wrote:
> > On Mon, Mar 23, 2009 at 07:08:08PM -0700, Doug Barton wrote:
> >> Since silc is off by default (and therefore the package won't change),
> >> was this necessary?
> > 
> > There are two viewpoints to this:
> > 
> > 1) The option is off by default so the package won't change, and thus
> > PORTREVISION doesn't need to be bumped.
> > 
> > 2) Not bumping PORTREVISION may cause the port to misbehave if it's
> > built with old libraries.
> 
> I don't see the logic in this. The port works just fine right now with
> the old libraries. Can you be more specific about the scenario you're
> concerned about?

Per what I see, shlib version of libsilcclient was bumped during
devel/silc-toolkit update.  Since net-im/libpurple explicitly depends on
named library, PORTREVISION bump is in order, since API could have
changed (thus the shlib version bump).  If silc-toolkit update was
merely a bugfix one, and shlib version retained, PORTREVISION should be
left intact.

./danfe