svn commit: r364287 - head/ports-mgmt/pkg-devel

[Adam McDougall]

On 08/11/2014 19:58, Adam McDougall wrote:
> On 08/11/2014 11:33, Bryan Drewery wrote:
>> On 2014-08-10 15:09, Vsevolod Stakhov wrote:
>>> Nonetheless, doesn't our ports policy defines to bump PORTREVISION in
>>> all cases that modifies a resulting package? Shlib provides/requires
>>> changing is definitely such a change. So you blame now pkg that it
>>> follows the current policy, don't you?
>>
>> I explained this in private to someone else as well...
>>
>> Yes it is the policy, but it is a different thing with packages. If a
>> bump is missed for ports users it is not a big problem as they can
>> remedy it with portmaster by rebuilding ports depending on the changed
>> shlib. Package users have no way to fix their packages, so the remote
>> must have rebuilt them to link to the new library so the user can have a
>> working system without needing to checkout ports every time a committer
>> is lazy about chases. Without a bump, or pkg handling it, it would
>> result in the user being forced to reinstall packages one by one or with
> 
> I don't intend to detract from a proper solution, but just to make a
> point, I can't even easily force individual packages to reinstall right
> now.  pkg upgrade -f p5-Geo-IP-1.43 ignores me, so I have to pkg remove
> -f p5-Geo-IP-1.43 then install it back and it fetches the fixed package.
> 
> I filed a bug report to get a proper version bump almost 2 weeks ago and
> no response:  https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=192240
> The port does not have an individual maintainer, just perl at FreeBSD.org.
>  Could someone jog it along please?

I just noticed r364627 took care of it in a sweep this afternoon,
disregard the previous paragraph.  Thanks.