On Tue, Mar 24, 2009 at 10:40:32AM +0000, Alexey Dokuchaev wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 23, 2009 at 07:19:37PM -0700, Doug Barton wrote:
> > Wesley Shields wrote:
> > > On Mon, Mar 23, 2009 at 07:08:08PM -0700, Doug Barton wrote:
> > >> Since silc is off by default (and therefore the package won't change),
> > >> was this necessary?
> > >
> > > There are two viewpoints to this:
> > >
> > > 1) The option is off by default so the package won't change, and thus
> > > PORTREVISION doesn't need to be bumped.
> > >
> > > 2) Not bumping PORTREVISION may cause the port to misbehave if it's
> > > built with old libraries.
> > I don't see the logic in this. The port works just fine right now with
> > the old libraries. Can you be more specific about the scenario you're
> > concerned about?
> Per what I see, shlib version of libsilcclient was bumped during
> devel/silc-toolkit update. Since net-im/libpurple explicitly depends on
> named library, PORTREVISION bump is in order, since API could have
> changed (thus the shlib version bump). If silc-toolkit update was
> merely a bugfix one, and shlib version retained, PORTREVISION should be
> left intact.
Exactly what I intended to say. Thank you Alexey. I have no way of
knowing if the API is the same or not so it's best to bump it just in