Date: Fri, 8 Feb 2013 10:36:09 -0500 From: Robert Huff <roberthuff@rcn.com> To: mexas@bristol.ac.uk Cc: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org, david@catwhisker.org Subject: Re: how to move 9.1 ports to HEAD? Message-ID: <20757.7017.86899.648999@jerusalem.litteratus.org> In-Reply-To: <201302081507.r18F7cPc035500@mech-cluster241.men.bris.ac.uk> References: <20130208145550.GY1799@albert.catwhisker.org> <201302081507.r18F7cPc035500@mech-cluster241.men.bris.ac.uk>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Anton Shterenlikht writes: > You already have (achieved this): ports is (still) not brnched as src > is. We use the head of the ports tree for all branches of FreeBSD. > > I don't think it's true. > While still on 9.1 ports, the latest > entry in UPDATING was (well I lost it now) > about NOV-2012. I believe the revision was > also substantially lower. > > AS soon as I switched to head, > the latest entry in UPDATING is from > 6-FEB-2013 and the revision is 311942. > > Or maybe I misunderstood you? You do. :-) The local _subversion repository_ (I know I'm using incorrent terminology) has a revision number: r######. Which is the same across different versions of FreeBSD. The individual ports _maintained within that repository_ have their individual ports numbers (e.g. libreoffice-3.6.5) ... which also does not vary with the FreeBSD release. One can have libreoffice-3.6.5 and libreoffice 3.5.4 - but those are two separate ports and both work (or should) on 8.3, 9.1, and -CURRENT. If a port has a minimum (or maximum) release of the OS it supports, there a mechanism for figuring that out and DTRT. Or did I misunderstand you? Respectfully, Robert Huff
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20757.7017.86899.648999>