On Sep 17, 2012, at 18:13, Dan Ports wrote: >> I don't see how that takes more time than it did before – the rebuild >> was needed anyway and the buildbot would have done it anyway: Either >> because rev-upgrade detected broken linkage, or because somebody >> commited a revbump. Remember, there's no point in keeping a broken >> package around. > > There might not be much point in keeping a broken package around, but I > think it's still valuable to have an identifier for each version. That > way, we know what version someone has installed, what version is > available on a mirror, that the signature file is for the same version > as the archive, etc. > > We could come up with a separate build ID or something for this, but I > don't think that buys us anything over just using the revision.
Yes, that's my thinking as well. The way in which I see it taking more time is in the activating and deactivating of every port and running rev-upgrade to determine if there are any linking errors. I could see that easily taking hours. We have multiple commits each hour, so this would take prohibitively long. Now, if there were instead a database that MacPorts could consult, that could be fast enough. _______________________________________________ macports-dev mailing list macports-dev@lists.macosforge.org http://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo/macports-dev
