Date: Tue, 14 Jul 2020 11:47:38 -0400 From: Jung-uk Kim <jkim@FreeBSD.org> To: Alexey Dokuchaev <danfe@freebsd.org> Cc: ports-committers@freebsd.org, svn-ports-all@freebsd.org, svn-ports-head@freebsd.org Subject: Re: svn commit: r542221 - in head/www: flashplayer linux-flashplayer Message-ID: <534110e7-b68b-102c-76fa-c2ab351851c2@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <20200714153818.GA19650@FreeBSD.org> References: <202007141515.06EFFN7x098890@repo.freebsd.org> <20200714153818.GA19650@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 20. 7. 14., Alexey Dokuchaev wrote: > On Tue, Jul 14, 2020 at 03:15:23PM +0000, Jung-uk Kim wrote: >> New Revision: 542221 >> URL: https://svnweb.freebsd.org/changeset/ports/542221 >> >> Log: >> Update to 32.0.0.403. >> >> Modified: >> head/www/flashplayer/Makefile >> head/www/linux-flashplayer/Makefile >> head/www/linux-flashplayer/distinfo >> >> ... >> @@ -2,7 +2,7 @@ >> >> PORTNAME= flashplayer >> PORTVERSION= 32.0 >> -PORTREVISION= 18 >> +PORTREVISION= 19 > > Is there a reason to abuse PORTREVISION instead of PORTVERSION=32.0.0.387 > like in the other port? I didn't search the history, but if there is, > perhaps it deserves a comment in the Makefile. No reason. Actually, I don't like it myself but I didn't bother because it will be removed at the end of this year. https://www.adobe.com/products/flashplayer/end-of-life.html Jung-uk Kim
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?534110e7-b68b-102c-76fa-c2ab351851c2>