On Tue, Aug 15, 2006 at 11:40:18AM -0400, Arnaud Bergeron wrote: > On 8/14/06, Stuart Henderson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >On 2006/08/14 17:59, Arnaud Bergeron wrote: > >> In which case, the patchlevel needs to be bumped (eg. foo-1.0.tgz -> > >> foo-1.0p0.tgz). > >> No boom here, unless the maintaner was lazy. > > > >No, /usr/lib changes don't bump patchlevels of every package. > > > You are right, but I was thinking about a dependancy in terms of other > packages.
You're still wrong, we would bump package names all the time otherwise. And we don't. There's a concept of package signature, built from the package name itself, and a freeze-dried version of every dependency used to build the package. That's what pkg_add uses to decide to update packages. As far as pkg names bumps go, we change pkgnames every time something *in the package directory itself* changes. Say, if we have to adjust WANTLIB, or DESCR, or something like that, then the package changes. That's the kind of thing the PLIST_DB database catches, since it will refuse to record distinct plists with the same package name (carefully dropping some information, like package signatures, for instance). This is done so that pkg_add can decide when to update: the pkg names, plus the pkg names of dependencies, are just enough to decide whether something is up-to-date or not. In fact, I need to write a patch so that messages like: Updating gimp-2.2.10 -> gimp-2.2.10 appear less confusing.
