On Mar 10, 2016, at 2:05 PM, Ryan Schmidt <[email protected]> wrote: >> That's probably safe, but I don't think there is a compelling reason to try >> and only revbump the minimal set of ports (better to have some needless >> rebuilds/downloads of binary archives than to have mysteriously broken >> ports). > > You can't programmatically revbump safely,
with existing tool(s). > because in ports with subports you have to manually determine which > subport(s) to revbump and how to do so. The general problem is something we should address. (a 'compatibility version' we store for ports and make part of the dependency engine? a better 'revbump a bunch of ports tool'? something else?) We should have a way to reliably force rebuilds > e.g. the php port is definitely a special case. (and is otherwise problematic since it has us distributing versions of php that no longer have upstream support) > So if you're manually examining all ports that depend on openssl, you can run > an "svn log" on them to see if any commits after r146162 updated the version > or revision. ick. -- Daniel J. Luke _______________________________________________ macports-dev mailing list [email protected] https://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo/macports-dev
