On 2011-8-13 00:24 , Blair Zajac wrote: > > On Aug 12, 2011, at 12:23 AM, vincent habchi wrote: > >> Ryan, >> >>> ...and it's not ok that it fetches from the HEAD of trunk. We want ports >>> that can be installed reproducibly, and a port that fetches a different >>> version of the upstream software each time it's run is not reproducible. >>> Pick a specific revision of their trunk that works correctly for you, and >>> pin the port to using that revision (using e.g. "svn.revision 123") and put >>> in the version field something corresponding, or using that revision's >>> date. For example if this is revision 123 from 2011-06-06 and this >>> represents the development effort leading up to llvm version 3.0, then the >>> version line might be "3.0-r123" or "3.0-20110606". >> >> I’d agree with you if any other port than dragonegg-devel would depend on >> llvm-devel. But this is not the case. As long as both ports are kept in >> sync, be it HEAD or some specific version, it should work. Aren’t there >> other ports that fetch directly from SVN HEAD? > > It's not the dependency between the two that's the issue, it's the > reproducibility and being able to say you have this version of the build. > Otherwise we may be fielding bug reports and not knowing (through MacPorts) > which version is installed.
Consider this sequence of events: port install llvm-devel (wait 3 weeks) port install dragonegg-devel At this point, llvm-devel is installed from a 3-week-old revision (since its version is still "svn" so it isn't considered outdated) and dragonegg-devel is installed (or fails to install) from the current revision. - Josh _______________________________________________ macports-dev mailing list macports-dev@lists.macosforge.org http://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/macports-dev
