On Sun, Jul 11, 2010 at 02:44:37PM +0200, Marc Espie wrote: > On Sun, Jul 11, 2010 at 02:31:05PM +0200, Landry Breuil wrote: > > I see what it does. But was it really so hard to provide AN EXAMPLE ?? > > It's possibly *not the point*, actually. > I've sent this patch to ports@ so that interested parties may comment. > If people don't understamd what the point of PLIST_DB is, or how it > currently works, or why this can be strengthened/why it might be a good idea > (or not), well, maybe they're not the target for this review.
I see what PLIST_DB does. But you make so many shortcuts 'oh this is soo obvious i'm not going to explain this' that it is impossible to follow your reasoning. > > So, for whoever is interested, here was the intent of the diff (as i would > > have like to see it explained since the beginning, for fuck's sake): > > >From what i understand, exact versions of libs and dependencies used > > when packaging are now registered in the plist. > > You've got half the point. Comparisons are allowed to return 2 and to update > the plist... which allows wantlib and depend version numbers to go up (but > not down) without register-plist complaining. > > Note that PLIST_DB is only supposed to catch pkgnames accidental fuck-ups, > which happen from time to time, and help people debug the problems. > > I'll admit to being surprised that people who work with PLIST_DB on a "daily" > basis actually know so little about what it does... :( You'll have to admit first that you're the only one understanding most of the framework, being it PLIST_DB, pkg_tools, or bsd.port.mk.. Landry
