From owner-freebsd-pkg@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Oct 10 23:39:57 2014 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-pkg@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [8.8.178.115]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1498CCED for ; Fri, 10 Oct 2014 23:39:57 +0000 (UTC) Received: from woozle.rinet.ru (woozle.rinet.ru [195.54.192.68]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 88C9425A for ; Fri, 10 Oct 2014 23:39:56 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by woozle.rinet.ru (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id s9ANdRip009515 for ; Sat, 11 Oct 2014 03:39:27 +0400 (MSK) (envelope-from marck@rinet.ru) Date: Sat, 11 Oct 2014 03:39:27 +0400 (MSK) From: Dmitry Morozovsky To: freebsd-pkg@freebsd.org Subject: poudriere: some vague idea for repackaging Message-ID: User-Agent: Alpine 2.00 (BSF 1167 2008-08-23) X-NCC-RegID: ru.rinet X-OpenPGP-Key-ID: 6B691B03 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.4.3 (woozle.rinet.ru [0.0.0.0]); Sat, 11 Oct 2014 03:39:27 +0400 (MSK) X-BeenThere: freebsd-pkg@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18-1 Precedence: list List-Id: Binary package management and package tools discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 10 Oct 2014 23:39:57 -0000 Colleagues, (I cut the subject a bit, it does not describe the idea fully) There are not too rare situations, where some lower level port/package got changes, but *does not* change API/ABI and/or list of contents: e.g, fix for off-by-one in libraries. In the following, call it "pkg-lower". I think we could suppose it is run/lib-dependency, not build-dependency. Of course, PORTREVISION (in case of a local fix) or PORTVERSION (in case of a fix from upstream) are changed. Currently, poudriere would delete all packages dependent on updated pkg-lower. And, hence, fully rebuild all of them. >From the subject: vague idea. Could we install all set of updated dependency packages, then unpack previously built backage, (if test phase is defined, run it) and just repack it then? For "Big Builders", we could save *A WHOLE LOT* of computing resources, I suppose... Well, the problem would be that we have package with the same version, but different manifest or other meta-files, hence different chechsums/signatures. I'm not ready to proclaim the path what we could do to mitigate this. Any thoughts/comments? Thanks! -- Sincerely, D.Marck [DM5020, MCK-RIPE, DM3-RIPN] [ FreeBSD committer: marck@FreeBSD.org ] ------------------------------------------------------------------------ *** Dmitry Morozovsky --- D.Marck --- Wild Woozle --- marck@rinet.ru *** ------------------------------------------------------------------------