On Sep 30, 2014, at 4:55 PM, Sean Farley wrote:

> As for this exact issue, it could be something as simple as a fallback
> test:
> 
> if checksum doesn't match and revision is new:
>  try downloading again
>  write state so we don't download in an infinite loop

That's a conceivable change. But let's look at what problems that particular 
change would involve:

* MacPorts would need to gain the capability to go back to a previous phase 
(fetch) after it has already been completed. Or perhaps simpler, MacPorts would 
need the ability to automatically clean a port and try it from the beginning 
based on some criteria. This would be quite useful for a number of issues 
MacPorts users currently experience, but it's not a capability that exists 
today.

* It assumes the port's revision will be increased. That's not always 
necessary. Sometimes the only change in the distfile is the name of (or 
presence of) the enclosing directory, or there are only changes in comments or 
documentation files or other files that don't affect the build, and in those 
cases there would be zero benefit to increasing the port's revision and forcing 
everyone to rebuild or redownload.

* The old distfile would get removed from our mirrors, making it impossible for 
anyone to later determine what exactly changed in the stealth update. Many 
maintainers handle stealth updates incorrectly. It is nice for others to be 
able to investigate after the fact.


_______________________________________________
macports-dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo/macports-dev

Reply via email to