Of variants and revbumping.

[Jeremy Huddleston Sequoia]

On Sep 16, 2013, at 15:46, Ryan Schmidt <ryandesign at macports.org> wrote:

> 
> On Sep 16, 2013, at 12:54, Eric A. Borisch <eborisch at macports.org> wrote:
> 
>> I'm preparing to commit the changes to mpich that have been discussed on the mailing list [1] and a ticket [2].
>> 
>> I will revbump port that depend on mpich by default so new distributable archives can be built.
>> 
>> But for other modified ports, I have a quick question of preferences: should I revbump ports that optionally (and not by default) depend on mpich, or just let rev-upgrade catch those?
>> 
>> For users installed without the specific (typically +mpich or +mpi) variant selected, the revbump would be a gratuitous rebuild, even though the Portfile has changed in the variant sections to select the newly supplied bin/libs from mpich[-devel]-default...
>> 
>> I can go either way -- I'll be modifying the Portfiles already. Is "rev-upgrade will catch it" an acceptable answer?
> 
> That's the way I went when I updated gd2 to 2.1.0 recently. I think it's reasonable. What do others think?

I don't think "rev-upgrade will catch it" is reasonable ... if installed files change in a meaningful way (such as location of linked dependencies), it needs a revbump.  Otherwise the binary packages we ship to customers won't be right.


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 4136 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.macosforge.org/pipermail/macports-dev/attachments/20130916/87e8bfb5/attachment.p7s>