there is a way to avoid strict libraries linking?

[Leinier Cruz Salfran]

On Wed, Apr 14, 2010 at 2:50 PM, Freddie Cash <fjwcash at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 14, 2010 at 11:18 AM, Leinier Cruz Salfran <
> salfrancl.listas at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On Wed, Apr 14, 2010 at 1:48 PM, Dan Nelson <dnelson at allantgroup.com>
>> wrote:> Just because you
>> > Anyway, the FreeBSD port maintainers usually bump the
>> > revision of dependant ports when a major library like libpng gets
>> upgraded,
>> > to force everyone to upgrade anything that depends on it.
>> >
>>
>> mmm .. I think it's not true because I maintain a port and i'm VERY
>> VERY restricted to update the port because I depends on a mentor that
>> will ONLY update the port in fbsd svn tree if I sent to him the
>> tinderbox log of the sucessfully build of the port .. so I have not
>> much patience to do all this things so I update the port and do ALL
>> task including constructing the package into tinderbox ONLY when a new
>> version of the program is available .. and I think that exists a lot
>> of ports maintainers that are in same situation
>>
>> do you agree with me that it's difficult to a port maintainer to
>> update his/her port because of this restriction????
>>
>
> The port maintainer doesn't *have to* update anything.  When library ports
> go through a library bump like this, all the ports that depend on it get an
> automatic PORTREVISION bump.
>

okey maybe i didn't understood the 'bump' means .. I must to thank you
because of comment about this subject

> All the port maintainer has to do is double-check that the port compiles
> with the new version of the lib.  Only if there are issues with that (which
> usually get picked up by the -exp runs on the ports cluster), then the port
> maintainer has to step in and fix things.
>

okey let me see if I understood you .. you mean that I create a
'ONE_PORT' to a specific program version and if one of the library on
which the 'ONE_PORT' depends change to a major version, then the
'ports cluster' put add PORTREVISION to the 'ONE_PORT' and update the
*_DEPENDS automatically????????


> 9 times out of 10, a port maintainer doesn't have to do anything with a port
> until a new version of the app is released.
>

okey okey do not repeat again .. I read 9 times out of 10 ;)


>
>> could be a good idea to plan and implement a system to allow fbsd
>> ports maintainers to maintain easyly the own ports via web or mail
>> ONCE a fbsd mentor have uploaded his/her port to fbsd svn
>> tree????????????
>>
>
> In several years of port maintainership, I've never had a need for anything
> like this.  A new version of an app I maintain is released, I update the
> port locally, test it, submit a PR with the update, someone looks at it and
> sends back suggestions/issues, the port is fixed locally and patches
> re-submitted to the PR, and then the port is committed to the tree.
>  Overall, not a long process.
>
> If you maintain enough ports for enough time, and generate enough committed
> PRs to annoy people enough, you get rewarded with a commit bit.  :)
>

oohh .. thanks for the tip :)