cvs commit: ports/graphics/eog-plugins Makefile ports/graphics/shotwell Makefile ports/graphics/ethumb Makefile ports/multimedia/dvdstyler Makefile ports/multimedia/mlt Makefile ports/net/mediatomb Makefile ports/net/minidlna Makefile ports/sysut

[Alexey Dokuchaev]

On Fri, Mar 04, 2011 at 11:55:19AM +0300, Boris Samorodov wrote:
> On Fri, 4 Mar 2011 16:37:25 +0800 wen heping wrote:
> > 2011/3/4 Boris Samorodov <bsam at ipt.ru>:
> > > On Fri, 4 Mar 2011 02:15:10 +0000 (UTC) Wen Heping wrote:
> > >
> > >>  Modified files:
> > >>   graphics/eog-plugins Makefile
> > >>   graphics/shotwell  Makefile
> > >>   graphics/ethumb   Makefile
> > >>   multimedia/dvdstyler Makefile
> > >>   multimedia/mlt    Makefile
> > >>   net/mediatomb    Makefile
> > >>   net/minidlna     Makefile
> > >>   sysutils/tracker-client Makefile
> > >>   www/swiggle     Makefile
> > >>   x11-fm/gnome-commander2 Makefile
> > >>   x11-fm/nautilus   Makefile
> > >>   x11-fm/thunar    Makefile
> > >>   x11-toolkits/nucleo Makefile
> > >>  Log:
> > >>  - Bump PORTREVISION to chase the update of libexif
> > >
> > > Was it necessary to bump those and other PORTREVISIONS? So
> > > far I was sure that PORTREVISION bumps are necessary as soon
> 
> > In porter's handbook:
> > Examples of when PORTREVISION should be bumped:
> > ....
> > Changes in the packing list or the install-time behavior of the
> > package (e.g. change to a script which generates initial data for the
> > package, like ssh host keys).
> > .....
> > This update changed plist.

I don't think so.  Update of *graphics/libexif* changed *that port's* plist
(added bunch of new translations), but shlib version was not bumped (it's
a minor update), so PORTREVISIONs of the *dependent* ports should had been
left intact.  Your mentor should have told you this. :-)

Now you've essentially urged lots of people around the world to rebuild
their perfectly fine packages (considering that libexif is fairly common
dependency).

./danfe