cvs commit: ports/shells/bash Makefile pkg-plist

[Garance A Drosihn]

At 9:37 AM +0100 3/26/09, Pav Lucistnik wrote:
>Garance A Drosihn pí”e v st 25. 03. 2009 v 18:18 -0400:
>
>>  >That is the only case I can think of.  Even changing the comment or
>>  >pkg-descr should have its PORTREVISION bumped in order to get a new
>>  >package built so users have the fresh description.
>>
>>  Ew, I don't like that at all.  Why should I rebuild (say) bash just
>>  because someone fixes a typo in the description?  The port is already
>>  installed, and I have no intention of reading the description until
>>  *maybe* the next time the package really does change.
>>
>>  It's probably not that big a deal for bash, which is fairly easy to
>>  build and well-behaved.  Now let's change the pkg-descr for some key
>>  component of Gnome, and have people spend a day to rebuild it and
>>  everything that depends on it, just because a description changed?
>
>Certainly not everything that depends on it. You have a good overview
>of how ports work?

Oh, right, this wouldn't be the kind of change which would trigger
rebuilds of other components, even if the change was to some kind
of library.  I was just thinking of some changes where I only had
one port which was really out-of-date, but updating that component
triggered rebuilds of many other ports.

Well, still, why rebuild *anything* because pkg-desc changed?

-- 
Garance Alistair Drosehn            =   gad at gilead.netel.rpi.edu
Senior Systems Programmer           or  gad at freebsd.org
Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute    or  drosih at rpi.edu