From owner-cvs-ports@FreeBSD.ORG  Tue Mar 24 11:29:24 2009
Return-Path: <owner-cvs-ports@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: cvs-ports@FreeBSD.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B040610656C9;
	Tue, 24 Mar 2009 11:29:24 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from wxs@atarininja.org)
Received: from syn.atarininja.org (syn.csh.rit.edu [129.21.60.158])
	by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 81DCB8FC1A;
	Tue, 24 Mar 2009 11:29:24 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from wxs@atarininja.org)
Received: by syn.atarininja.org (Postfix, from userid 1001)
	id B1C1B5C2E; Tue, 24 Mar 2009 07:29:23 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Tue, 24 Mar 2009 07:29:23 -0400
From: Wesley Shields <wxs@FreeBSD.org>
To: Alexey Dokuchaev <danfe@FreeBSD.org>
Message-ID: <20090324112923.GD1292@atarininja.org>
References: <200903240023.n2O0NVBb013624@repoman.freebsd.org>
	<49C84088.9020505@FreeBSD.org>
	<20090324021518.GC1292@atarininja.org> <49C84339.60201@FreeBSD.org>
	<20090324104032.GA47617@FreeBSD.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20090324104032.GA47617@FreeBSD.org>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.19 (2009-01-05)
Cc: cvs-ports@FreeBSD.org, Doug Barton <dougb@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 11:29:25 -0000

On Tue, Mar 24, 2009 at 10:40:32AM +0000, Alexey Dokuchaev wrote:
> 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.

Exactly what I intended to say.  Thank you Alexey.  I have no way of
knowing if the API is the same or not so it's best to bump it just in
case.

-- WXS