[gentoo-dev] ebuild revisions

[gentoo-dev] ebuild revisions

[Andrew Gaffney]

Whenever an ebuild goes from say -r1 to -r2, that is just a revision of the ebuild, not 
the program itself, correct? If so, in most cases, you will get the exact same code 
generated, correct? If the first one works, what is the point of upgrading to the next 
revision to get the exact same code?

-- 
Andrew Gaffney


--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] ebuild revisions

[Andrew Gaffney]

Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Tue, 30 Dec 2003 08:28:07 -0600 Andrew Gaffney
> <agaffney@skylineaero.com> wrote:
> | Whenever an ebuild goes from say -r1 to -r2, that is just a revision
> | of the ebuild, not the program itself, correct? If so, in most cases,
> | you will get the exact same code generated, correct? If the first one
> | works, what is the point of upgrading to the next revision to get the
> | exact same code?
> 
> Incorrect. A revision bump will only be done if the installed code is
> changed enough that the user should upgrade.
> 
> For example, if I added a minor compile fix to foo-1.0.ebuild, I
> wouldn't do a revision bump. However, if I added a security or
> functionality patch to foo-1.0.ebuild, or if I made significant changes
> to foo's configuration files, I *would* bump it to-r1.

Okay. That makes sense.

-- 
Andrew Gaffney


--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] ebuild revisions

[Ciaran McCreesh]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 855 bytes --]

On Tue, 30 Dec 2003 08:28:07 -0600 Andrew Gaffney
<agaffney@skylineaero.com> wrote:
| Whenever an ebuild goes from say -r1 to -r2, that is just a revision
| of the ebuild, not the program itself, correct? If so, in most cases,
| you will get the exact same code generated, correct? If the first one
| works, what is the point of upgrading to the next revision to get the
| exact same code?

Incorrect. A revision bump will only be done if the installed code is
changed enough that the user should upgrade.

For example, if I added a minor compile fix to foo-1.0.ebuild, I
wouldn't do a revision bump. However, if I added a security or
functionality patch to foo-1.0.ebuild, or if I made significant changes
to foo's configuration files, I *would* bump it to-r1.

-- 
Ciaran McCreesh
Mail:    ciaranm at gentoo.org
Web:     http://dev.gentoo.org/~ciaranm


[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] ebuild revisions

[foser]

On Tue, 2003-12-30 at 15:28, Andrew Gaffney wrote:
> Whenever an ebuild goes from say -r1 to -r2, that is just a revision of the ebuild, not 
> the program itself, correct? If so, in most cases, you will get the exact same code 
> generated, correct?

Wrong, a revision bump defines the point where the earlier revision and
the newer revision aren't the same thing anymore. For example added
patches would cause a bump.

>  If the first one works, what is the point of upgrading to the next 
> revision to get the exact same code?

In short this is all pretty much covered in
http://www.gentoo.org/doc/en/policy.xml#doc_chap3 under 'versioning and
revision bumps'.

- foser


--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] ebuild revisions

[Brian Jackson]

On Tuesday 30 December 2003 08:28 am, Andrew Gaffney wrote:
> Whenever an ebuild goes from say -r1 to -r2, that is just a revision of the
> ebuild, not the program itself, correct? If so, in most cases, you will get
> the exact same code generated, correct? If the first one works, what is the
> point of upgrading to the next revision to get the exact same code?

In addition to what ciaranm said, there are cases where the -r has to do with 
the package version. The only cases I know off the top of my head are with 
kernels. Most of the external patchsets (ck-sources, aa-sources, etc.) are 
setup this way.

--Iggy
-- 
Home -- http://www.brianandsara.net
Gentoo -- http://gentoo.brianandsara.net

--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list