Re: pkg/42819 (databases/ruby-activeldap distfile checksum error)

[Robert Elz <kre%munnari.OZ.AU@localhost>]

    Date:        Tue, 16 Feb 2010 21:10:23 +0900 (JST)
    From:        Takahiro Kambe <taca%back-street.net@localhost>
    Message-ID:  <20100216.211023.71560628.taca%back-street.net@localhost>

  | It is true that it looks like format revbump but dependency change
  | affects content of binary package.

Yes, I understand - my point was that no-one but you could
have ever seen one of the earlier version binary packages.
For all the rest of us, the earlier one never existed.

The revbump though is (aside from making an uglier package name) entirely
harmless, the DIST_SUBDIR causes (caused) those of us who had fetched
the distfile earlier and gotten the new one to have to fetch it again,
for no particularly good purpose - so when it is acceptable to avoid that
(when no-one using pkgsrc could possibly have gotten the earlier
distfile), I'd generally avoid using a DIST_SUBDIR.   Use it when any
pkgsrc user could have fetched the earlier version (when the master site
changes it after the package exists, for example.)   The existence of the
old distfile on ftp.netbsd.org is going to be a guarantee that a DIST_SUBDIR
is needed, its absence is a hint that it might not be.

kre