Alexey Dokuchaev wrote: > On Mon, Mar 23, 2009 at 07:19:37PM -0700, Doug Barton wrote: >> Wesley Shields wrote: >>> On Mon, Mar 23, 2009 at 07:08:08PM -0700, Doug Barton wrote: >>>> Since silc is off by default (and therefore the package won't change), >>>> was this necessary? >>> There are two viewpoints to this: >>> >>> 1) The option is off by default so the package won't change, and thus >>> PORTREVISION doesn't need to be bumped. >>> >>> 2) Not bumping PORTREVISION may cause the port to misbehave if it's >>> built with old libraries. >> I don't see the logic in this. The port works just fine right now with >> the old libraries. Can you be more specific about the scenario you're >> concerned about? > > Per what I see, shlib version of libsilcclient was bumped during > devel/silc-toolkit update. Since net-im/libpurple explicitly depends on > named library,
IFF you have that option enabled. It's off by default. This is one of the main reasons I'd like to propose a replacement for PORTREVISION/PORTEPOCH that can more easily be set within an optional part of the Makefile. Doug _______________________________________________ [email protected] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/cvs-all To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[email protected]"
