On Mon, Sep 16, 2013 at 6:55 PM, Jeremy Huddleston Sequoia < jerem...@macports.org> wrote:
> > On Sep 16, 2013, at 16:49, Ryan Schmidt <ryandes...@macports.org> wrote: > > > > > On Sep 16, 2013, at 18:41, Jeremy Huddleston Sequoia wrote: > > > >> On Sep 16, 2013, at 15:46, Ryan Schmidt wrote: > >> > >>> On Sep 16, 2013, at 12:54, Eric A. Borisch wrote: > >>> > >>>> I'm preparing to commit the changes to mpich that have been discussed > on the mailing list [1] and a ticket [2]. > >>>> > >>>> I will revbump port that depend on mpich by default so new > distributable archives can be built. > >>>> > >>>> But for other modified ports, I have a quick question of preferences: > should I revbump ports that optionally (and not by default) depend on > mpich, or just let rev-upgrade catch those? > >>>> > >>>> For users installed without the specific (typically +mpich or +mpi) > variant selected, the revbump would be a gratuitous rebuild, even though > the Portfile has changed in the variant sections to select the newly > supplied bin/libs from mpich[-devel]-default... > >>>> > >>>> I can go either way -- I'll be modifying the Portfiles already. Is > "rev-upgrade will catch it" an acceptable answer? > >>> > >>> That's the way I went when I updated gd2 to 2.1.0 recently. I think > it's reasonable. What do others think? > >> > >> I don't think "rev-upgrade will catch it" is reasonable ... if > installed files change in a meaningful way (such as location of linked > dependencies), it needs a revbump. Otherwise the binary packages we ship > to customers won't be right. > > > > We are only talking about non-default variants. We don't ship binary > packages using non-default variants. When default variants are affected, > absolutely the revision should be increased to fix the binary packages. > > True, but someone *could* setup a repository with additional packages for > non-default variants. > > My $0.02 is that I'd do the bump to be on the safe side. > If there is a use case (your 'someone could') that is negatively impacted by not rev-bumping, I'm fine with it. As I stated from the get-go, anything with a default dependency would certainly be rev-bumped, but that's two or three of the twenty or so packages that will be (unnecessarily, for most) rebuilt if I bump everything. Of course, for any of those that are distributable, the compile time will be farmed out to the buildbots... I'll go ahead and bump everything when I get around to committing this unless there's a uproar. :) - Eric
_______________________________________________ macports-dev mailing list macports-dev@lists.macosforge.org https://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo/macports-dev
