cvs commit: ports MOVED
ade at FreeBSD.org
Sat Sep 3 16:09:40 PDT 2005
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
On Sep 03, 2005, at 15:00 , Pav Lucistnik wrote:
> I did actually built all ports that uses bison before committing this
> update, and I found single failure, which I handled using bison175
Which bit of "no sweeping changes before 6.0-RELEASE" was unclear?
Bison 2.0 is absolutely not backwards compatible with 1.75 (see all
the fun and games with 1.875 as an example).
Just because ports *build* with the new bison does not mean that they
actually work correctly. If anything, devel/bison should have been
left as-is, and a devel/bison20 brought in (along the lines of the
existing bison1875 port).
> More to say, that MOVED line does not prevent portupgrade from
> to 2.0, just tested it. I'd love to know the reasoning behind Ade's
Because I was expecting you to do the right thing, and bring in devel/
bison20, and not blindly upgrade a port with a large number of
consumers to an incompatible release, in the middle of a ports
slush. The MOVED entry was a subtle hint towards the way things
should have been done. Obviously, it was *too* subtle.
Right now, the best thing you could do would be to revert the update
of devel/bison back to 1.75 then *after* 6.0-RELEASE happens, bring
up a devel/bison20, kill off devel/bison (at which point the MOVED
entry will work), and manage the upgrade in a more appropriate manner.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (Darwin)
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
More information about the cvs-ports