On 10/06/2015 04:35 PM, Rich Freeman wrote: > On Tue, Oct 6, 2015 at 12:44 PM, Zac Medico <zmed...@gentoo.org> wrote: >> On 10/06/2015 06:33 AM, William Hubbs wrote: >>> I don't think the revbump of net-misc/openconnect-7.06-r1 to -r2 was >>> necessary. When the change purely affects use flags, that is picked up >>> by the pm and there is no need to force everyone to rebuild the package. >> >> The same goes for dependency changes if the package manager has an >> option like emerge --changed-deps. So, apparently the assumption is that >> all relevant package managers implement behavior like emerge --newuse >> and/or --changed-use, but they don't necessarily implement --changed-deps? > > Are there any negative consequences if you don't rebuild a package > that has new use flags, as there are if you don't rebuild one with new > dependencies (in some circumstances)?
Yes, there are some circumstances where may lead to odd behavior. For example, it can change the way that deps like || ( foo[a] bar[b] ) behave (bug 278729 [1]). > In situations where there are, we should revbump. If we care about cases like || ( foo[a] bar[b] ), then it applies to anything that can appear in this sort of dependency relationship. > The discussion around bumping on dep changes isn't necessarily to bump > them ANYTIME a dep changes, but only under some circumstances. (In > the more general cases you'd bump most of the time, but there are a > bunch of cases where you wouldn't have to, and some of them would > otherwise result in bumping dozens of packages at once.) So, there is > benefit to bumping even if every PM had an option like --changed-deps. Yeah, there can be a benefit, as long as you're not one of the people who uses --changed-deps for all updates (revbumps for dependency changes are basically irrelevant to these people). [1] https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=278729 -- Thanks, Zac
