Page MenuHomeFreeBSD

databases/leofs: move to lang/erlang as dependency (OTP21) so we can deprecate lang/erlang-runtime20 which is not in support anymore
Needs RevisionPublic

Authored by dch on May 28 2019, 8:26 PM.

Details

Reviewers
jrm
olgeni
trociny
Test Plan

poudriere 12.0R amd64 & 13.0-CURRENT amd64 OK, waiting on the
rest

Diff Detail

Lint
No Linters Available
Unit
No Unit Test Coverage
Build Status
Buildable 24570
Build 23356: arc lint + arc unit

Event Timeline

dch created this revision.May 28 2019, 8:26 PM

I would suggest to use lang/erlang-runtime21 so that lang/erlang stays free for upgrades as the "user facing" Erlang, just in case..

dch updated this revision to Diff 58011.May 28 2019, 8:56 PM

bump PORTREVISION to force a rebuild and therefore ensure everybody gets
a warning message

jrm added a comment.May 29 2019, 2:17 AM

I don't think users will get a warning when installing the package. I also don't think there is any change in the package, so bumping PORTREVISION is probably not necessary. @olgeni's suggestion?

trociny accepted this revision.May 29 2019, 7:42 AM

LGTM

This revision is now accepted and ready to land.May 29 2019, 7:42 AM
dch added a comment.Jun 27 2019, 8:26 AM

I still think it's worth bumping the PORTREVISION to ensure everything
is rebuilt correctly. Erlang is picky about this, as explicit versions
are bound into the runtime configuration.

The original intent was to get this change sorted out before 2019Q3
starts which maximises time for users to get their stuff sorted.

In D20450#449537, @dch wrote:

I still think it's worth bumping the PORTREVISION to ensure everything is rebuilt correctly.

Yup - should definitely be bumped if moving to the -runtime version.

jrm accepted this revision.Jun 27 2019, 8:59 AM

I was referring to the PORTREVISION bump on lang/erlang-runtime.

Did I miss that you addressed @olgeni's suggestion? I would suggest to use lang/erlang-runtime21 so that lang/erlang stays free for upgrades as the "user facing" Erlang, just in case..

jrm requested changes to this revision.Jun 27 2019, 9:05 AM

Ooops.. I did not mean to accept this before addressing @olgeni's suggestion about the dependency.

This revision now requires changes to proceed.Jun 27 2019, 9:05 AM