Hi, On Mon, Mar 30, 2009 at 09:02:00AM -0700, David O'Brien wrote: > On Wed, Mar 25, 2009 at 06:18:49PM -0400, Garance A Drosihn wrote: > > 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. > > I agree for you, as an end user. The thing is that both you and the > package cluster uses the same indicator to decide if you should rebuild > the package. So I guess a maintainer could also say, "Hey I fixed that > typo, but why is every 'pkg_add -r' user still reporting it to me?".
I'm not up to date on what the package building machines are doing, but a simple md5 of the port's directory (via shar, tar or whatever) would solve that problem. Storing a special directory (per release) with 'PKGNAME' -> 'md5' symlinks would provide a simple cache. For completeness one could add a PKGNAME version of all-depends-list (based on the INDEX?) and a build id (uname -a?) to the list of things going into the md5. Regards, -Jeremy -- FreeBSD - Because the best things in life are free... http://www.freebsd.org/ _______________________________________________ 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"