--- Petersen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > But still, a port requires upgrading or it does not. Using 'r', > > portupgrade ultimately checks whether some port should be > upgraded. > > Are you saying that the 'r' switch involves a different decision > > making process than 'a'? > > > > The -a switch will upgrade a port only if its version number has > increased (as you know). > > The -r switch will upgrade a port if one of its dependancies has > been > upgraded, regardless of whether its version number has changed or > not. > > e.g. > > Appbar-1.0 depends on libfoo-1.0. Libfoo gets a portbump to 1.1. > portupgrade -r libfoo will install libfoo-1.1, plus also force a > recompile and reinstallation of appbar-1.0, irrespective of the > fact > that appbar's version remains the same. Thus, any ABI changes that > happened in libfoo that could potentially break appbar that was > compiled/linked against the previous version are limited. > > In an ideal world, this wouldn't be a problem. ABIs and APIs > should remain constant, until a library revision bump (i.e., if > libfoo.1's ABI changed and broke apps, it shoulda been bumped to libfoo.2). > Most times you can get away with not recompiling a port's dependants > because developers, but if you don't then it can shoot you in the foot > (read the recent list archives regarding openssl-0.9.8 to see an example of > this).
Thank you very much (BTW, there is something missing in your last sentence). One last thing. Is this the case with the 'R' switch as well? __________________________________________________________ Find your next car at http://autos.yahoo.ca _______________________________________________ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"