Ok, thanks for the explanation. And the fix to my logic in the Portfile.
David
On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 8:14 AM, Ryan Schmidt
wrote:
>
> On Jan 13, 2016, at 11:53 AM, David Strubbe wrote:
>
> > Oh ok. I have seen some ports have a revision increased recently because
> of a change of default vari
On Jan 13, 2016, at 11:53 AM, David Strubbe wrote:
> Oh ok. I have seen some ports have a revision increased recently because of a
> change of default variants, so I was following that, but I guess they
> shouldn't have been.
It varies. You just need to ask yourself: will this change result in
Oh ok. I have seen some ports have a revision increased recently because of
a change of default variants, so I was following that, but I guess they
shouldn't have been.
David
On Wed, Jan 13, 2016 at 12:47 PM, Ryan Schmidt
wrote:
>
> On Jan 13, 2016, at 11:45 AM, Ryan Schmidt wrote:
>
> > But th
On Jan 13, 2016, at 11:45 AM, Ryan Schmidt wrote:
> But there was no reason to increase the port's revision, since the user's
> existing variants will be preserved in the upgrade. Regardless whether the
> user had the atlas or accelerate or openblas variant of octupus 5.0.1_0
> installed, they
ilding
> atlas.
> Modified Paths
>
> • trunk/dports/science/octopus/Portfile
> Diff
>
> Modified: trunk/dports/science/octopus/Portfile (144606 => 144607)
>
> --- trunk/dports/science/octopus/Portfile 2016-01-13 16:51:07 UTC (rev
> 144606)
> +++ trunk/dport
