hi,

> >: All of which is a perfectly valid reason to bump the version number.
> >
> > Please elaborate.  Why is that a reason to bump the version?  Why is
> >it useful to have two identical packages with different version
> >numbers?
> 
> They are not identical. One works on AIX etc., and one doesn't.
> (As far as I understand)

  If it compiled and installed on AIX before but didn't work, and now
works, that is a valid reason to bump the version.  If it did not
install before, it is not.  As I understood it, the latter is the case
here.  If I'm mistaken, then the version bump was indeed required.

> > If the version number is bumped, the installed version is no longer
> >up-to-date, as indicated by pkg_chk or the bulk build.  This means
> >many people will rebuild it for exactly zeor gain.  Plus, since
> >pkg_install installs into /usr (at least on NetBSD), which is
> >read-only on sandboxed bulk builds, this has to be done manually.
> 
> That's a problem of pkg_chk and whatnot not respecting the PKGTOOLS_REQD 
> setting.

  No.  pkg_chk's job is to make sure packages are *up to date*.
PKGTOOLS_REQD lists the minimum acceptable version.  Those are two
different concepts.

					yours,
					dillo