On 9/16/2010 6:15 PM, Doug Barton wrote:
On 9/16/2010 3:35 PM, Anonymous wrote:
Dominic Fandrey<kamik...@bsdforen.de> writes:
On 16/09/2010 19:17, Dmitry Marakasov wrote:
* Dominic Fandrey (kamik...@bsdforen.de) wrote:
Just out of curiosity, why a version bump because of a build
dependency?
I don't think an autoconf update should have an effect on any
/running/ software but build systems. And I don't see how rebuilding
all the software improves it.
This is not a criticism - I just think there is something I don't
understand and that worries me.
My guess is to uncover *early* build failures that exp-run didn't catch.
We shouldn't use our users to beta-test infrastructure changes.
Sorry, I'm not feeling well atm and realize that I didn't write what I
was thinking here. What I intended to say was that we _don't_
intentionally use the ports system to force our users to beta test
changes. I think it goes without saying that we _shouldn't_ do this,
although I think that changes like this are a platinum-coated example of
why we need to have -stable and -dev branches for ports.
Doug
--
... and that's just a little bit of history repeating.
-- Propellerheads
Improve the effectiveness of your Internet presence with
a domain name makeover! http://SupersetSolutions.com/
_______________________________________________
freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
