At 9:30 PM -0700 3/23/09, David O'Brien wrote:
On Mon, Mar 23, 2009 at 09:23:25PM -0400, Wesley Shields wrote:
On Mon, Mar 23, 2009 at 11:14:13PM +0000, David O'Brien wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 13, 2009 at 01:34:26PM +0100, Pav Lucistnik wrote:
> > David O'Brien wrote:
> > >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?
..
Just changing the maintainer should not require the user to do anything.
That is the only case I can think of. Even changing the comment or
pkg-descr should have its PORTREVISION bumped in order to get a new
package built so users have the fresh description.
Ew, I don't like that at all. Why should I rebuild (say) bash just
because someone fixes a typo in the description? The port is already
installed, and I have no intention of reading the description until
*maybe* the next time the package really does change.
It's probably not that big a deal for bash, which is fairly easy to
build and well-behaved. Now let's change the pkg-descr for some key
component of Gnome, and have people spend a day to rebuild it and
everything that depends on it, just because a description changed?
In a file that no one is reading given that the port is already
installed?
--
Garance Alistair Drosehn = g...@gilead.netel.rpi.edu
Senior Systems Programmer or g...@freebsd.org
Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute or dro...@rpi.edu
_______________________________________________
cvs-all@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/cvs-all
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "cvs-all-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
