On Sun, 7 Dec 2008 16:00:16 +0100 Eric Faurot <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sun, 7 Dec 2008 12:42:42 +0000 > Stuart Henderson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > On 2008/12/07 12:23, Eric Faurot wrote: > > > That is what I thought too at first, but this is very annoying and I don't > > > think it is really worth the hassle: This change would have the same > > > impact > > > on the resulting packages as changing WRKOBJDIR when building them, which > > > is not supposed to matter wrt to packages and updates anyway. > > > > The rules are quite straightforward, if it affects the packing list > > or the files in the package, then the bump is necessary. > > I understand that. My point is that the WRKOBJDIR setting currently affects > the files in the package, and that is not something the versioning scheme can > know about anyway. So not bumping individual package's version would break > things I meant: would *not* break things more than they are already. > more than they are already. Bumping python package would however change all > package > dependency lists, which could be enough IMHO to get things updated correctly. > Just like a port are not generally bumped when a lib in WANTLIB change, but > the > resulting package does when it is rebuild, and it is updated just fine. > > Eric.
