On Sun, Feb 19, 2012 at 09:47:54PM -0500, Sahil Tandon wrote: > On Mon, 2012-02-20 at 01:23:36 +0000, Alexey Dokuchaev wrote: > > "Wine argument" does not sound too technical to me. > > I have no clue what that means, but at this juncture it is irrelevant.
Mikhail made a reference to buying a bottle of dry red wine in a store in the original email which you've sent me the link to. Not sure why you didn't notice it. :-) > > Thus, it's safer to always specify it. At least it allows to catch > > versions inconsistencies earlier. > > No, it is not always safer to specify it; and by the time I saw your > latest contribution to this thread, I see that dougb@ has done a > splendid job of trying to explain the opposing viewpoint to you rather > clearly. Yes, he did (as always). > I trust that has satiated your desire for people to repeat the > technical components of discussion that had already been archived on > freebsd-ports. Right, sorry I didn't catch the point originally from mi@. I was viewing the issue from a limited angle. Doug pointed out exact deficiency in my thinking and provided real scenario when it can be a bummer (that is, if one wants to hold shlib dependency while being able to chase updates of the leaf ports). Previously I did not consider that dependency might be held for some reason. ./danfe _______________________________________________ [email protected] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/cvs-all To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[email protected]"
