Apache2 rev bump for OpenSSL update

[Ryan Schmidt]

On Mar 10, 2016, at 2:15 PM, Daniel J. Luke <dluke at geeklair.net> wrote:

> On Mar 10, 2016, at 2:05 PM, Ryan Schmidt <ryandesign at macports.org> wrote:
>>> That's probably safe, but I don't think there is a compelling reason to try and only revbump the minimal set of ports (better to have some needless rebuilds/downloads of binary archives than to have mysteriously broken ports).
>> 
>> You can't programmatically revbump safely,
> 
> with existing tool(s).
> 
>> because in ports with subports you have to manually determine which subport(s) to revbump and how to do so.
> 
> The general problem is something we should address.
> 
> (a 'compatibility version' we store for ports and make part of the dependency engine? a better 'revbump a bunch of ports tool'? something else?)
> 
> We should have a way to reliably force rebuilds

We do: increase the revision.

If you mean we should have a reliable way to programmatically increase the revision of a port, maybe, but I'm not sure how to programmatically understand the coding style of a given portfile.


>> e.g. the php port is definitely a special case.
> 
> (and is otherwise problematic since it has us distributing versions of php that no longer have upstream support)

I don't consider that a problem. The php web site also still distributes versions of php that they no longer support. In any case it does not relate to the discussion at hand.


>> So if you're manually examining all ports that depend on openssl, you can run an "svn log" on them to see if any commits after r146162 updated the version or revision.
> 
> ick.