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

[wen heping]

2011/3/4 Alexey Dokuchaev <danfe at freebsd.org>:
> 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. :-)

miwi has the same opinion as you here.


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

Also libexif.12.so did not change the shlib version, I knew from upstream
this is a security update , so I think there should be something changed
in the shlib. I think it is safe and worthy to force all the user rebuild their
package which depend on libexif.


wen


>
> ./danfe
>



-- 
真理从来没有战胜过谬误，真理只有在坚持谬误的人死去后才成为真理。