On Apr 8, 2012, at 8:42 AM, Rainer Müller wrote: > On 2012-04-08 13:57 , Clemens Lang wrote: >> Not running rev-upgrade automatically will probably cause it never to be >> run at all by the average user. We could run the analysis phase >> automatically and instruct the user to issue port rev-upgrade to trigger >> the rebuild manually when problems occur. However, as said before, >> there's no point in keeping broken binaries and users might just as well >> be annoyed by updates breaking their other ports as much as they are >> annoyed by some phase trying to fix it automatically for them. > > Instead of running rev-upgrade automatically we could follow the > approach in selfupdate/upgrade outdated. 'port selfupdate' prints a > message that users should run 'port upgrade outdated' to upgrade their > ports. > > For rev-upgrade, that could be implemented as a message in the form of > "X broken ports found, run 'port rev-upgrade' to rebuild these ports." > and do not automatically pursue the upgrade. > > Personally I switched to the 'report' action for rev-upgrade in > macports.conf, which is suitable for developers. However such an option > is not a replacement for a sane default behavior for end users.
I think it should be noted that rev-upgrade isn't really optional in the same way that 'upgrade outdated' is -- rev-upgrade is detecting genuinely broken binaries and fixing them, automatically. As an end user, I just want things to work. If port(1) automatically fixes broken ports on my system, all the better. I don't personally think adding additional steps to fixing otherwise broken binaries is a better experience for users. -landonf
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
_______________________________________________ macports-dev mailing list macports-dev@lists.macosforge.org http://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/macports-dev