From owner-freebsd-ports Tue Jan 22 1:13:58 2002 Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Received: from infinitive.futureperfectcorporation.com (infinitive.futureperfectcorporation.com [196.25.137.68]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 7850B37B402 for ; Tue, 22 Jan 2002 01:13:53 -0800 (PST) Received: (qmail 61636 invoked by uid 0); 22 Jan 2002 09:13:45 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO gerund.futureperfectcorporation.com) (196.25.137.65) by infinitive.futureperfectcorporation.com with DES-CBC3-SHA encrypted SMTP; 22 Jan 2002 09:13:45 -0000 Received: (qmail 81038 invoked by uid 1001); 22 Jan 2002 09:14:11 -0000 Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2002 11:14:11 +0200 From: Neil Blakey-Milner To: Tadayuki OKADA Cc: mi@aldan.algebra.com, will@csociety.org, ports@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: ports/graphics/gd Makefile pkg-comment Message-ID: <20020122111411.A80928@mithrandr.moria.org> References: <20020121232710.711cd51d.tadayuki@mediaone.net> <200201220425.g0M4PlQ53898@aldan.algebra.com> <20020121233923.75304d3c.tadayuki@mediaone.net> <20020122003537.7d1eadbb.tadayuki@mediaone.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i In-Reply-To: <20020122003537.7d1eadbb.tadayuki@mediaone.net>; from tadayuki@mediaone.net on Tue, Jan 22, 2002 at 12:35:37AM -0500 Organization: iTouch Labs X-Operating-System: FreeBSD 4.3-RELEASE i386 X-URL: http://mithrandr.moria.org/nbm/ Sender: owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.org On Tue 2002-01-22 (00:35), Tadayuki OKADA wrote: > On Mon, 21 Jan 2002 23:39:23 -0500 > Tadayuki OKADA wrote: > > > Would you be able to offer an example on how this is relevant to the > > > argument? Thanks! > > Sorry, I was not clear. > > > > I meant: > > If port A depends on port B's library. > > port B updated. Assume it breaks binary compatibility. > > port A build will not be broken, so forget PORTREVISION bump. > > People update port B, but not port A. so port A will stop working. > > And isn't it the rule to bump PORTREVISION when binary is changed? > We don't want 2 different packages which have same version but depend on > different version of shared library, do we? It should be a rule, but it's a bit hard to manage at the moment. (What's needed is a means to signal that a package needs a PORTREVISION bump. In theory, any consumer of jpeg, even those that don't use jpeg directly in their LIB_DEPENDS lines, will be needed to get a PORTREVISION bump when the major version of jpeg changes. ie, every kde application... See why it's a bit hard to manage at the moment? As far as I'm aware, Debian's management scripts will notice the changing version requirements for jpeg.9 to jpeg.10, and thus increment the package revision.) Neil -- Neil Blakey-Milner nbm@mithrandr.moria.org To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-ports" in the body of the message