Portupgrade not handling dependencies

[Michael Powell]

b. f. wrote:

>> But I have seen portupgrade something and then a subsequent run
>>shows this port as being 'newer' than the version it's supposed to be.
>>I've
[snip] 
>>also noticed a few times it seemed like it was upgrading the same
>>version(s) over again. I just chalked this up to the ports system being in
>>a state of
>>
> 
> I've never seen this without an f,r, or R flag.  Out of curiosity, do
> you remember the ports involved?
> 

Since everything built, installed, and ran correctly I never really payed it 
much attention. Some time ago, maybe a month or two back, it seemed like 
Apache 2 and PHP5 were getting rebuilt more often than I was used to seeing 
in the past. I just figured the ports were getting fine tuned on an almost 
daily basis and just chalked it up to that. But there was a time or two that 
Apache "updated" to the same version a few days in a row. After a few 
iterations it stopped. 

One example just occurred on my dev web server at home yesterday. I did not 
see pdflib-7.0.3 listed as needing updating when I ran portversion. Yet when 
I did portupgrade -a for the couple of others which did need updating I also 
got pdflib-7.0.3 upgraded to pdflib-7.0.4, even though I did not see it 
listed by portversion. So now if I run portsdb -uF && pkgdb -u && 
portversion it will indicate an ">" next to pdflib.

Since it has caused no problem of any kind I don't worry about it. Usually 
when an oddity like this surfaces and I repeat my csup/portsdb/pkgdb and 
portversion run a day, or two, or three, later it just takes care of itself. 
Just an oddity which doesn't seem to be harmful. I just figure it's the 
ports system existing in a fluid state and until or unless something breaks 
I'm not concerned.

-Mike