From owner-freebsd-libh Thu Sep 26 10: 3:20 2002 Delivered-To: freebsd-libh@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.FreeBSD.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1553B37B401 for ; Thu, 26 Sep 2002 10:03:19 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail1.qc.uunet.ca (mail1.qc.uunet.ca [198.168.54.16]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5B06543E77 for ; Thu, 26 Sep 2002 10:03:18 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from anarcat@anarcat.ath.cx) Received: from xtanbul (IDENT:506@[216.94.147.34]) by mail1.qc.uunet.ca (8.10.2/8.10.2) with ESMTP id g8QH3CZ16211; Thu, 26 Sep 2002 13:03:13 -0400 Date: Thu, 26 Sep 2002 13:03:13 -0400 Subject: Package versionning (was: cvs commit: libh/lib/sysinstall Feature.cc) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v482) Cc: Alexander Langer , freebsd-libh@FreeBSD.ORG To: Alexander Langer From: Antoine Beaupre In-Reply-To: <20020926155153.GC47655@fump.kawo2.rwth-aachen.de> Message-Id: Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.482) Sender: owner-freebsd-libh@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Thursday, September 26, 2002, at 11:51 AM, Alexander Langer wrote: > Thus spake Antoine Beaupre (anarcat@anarcat.ath.cx): > > http://docs.freebsd.org/cgi/getmsg.cgi?fetch=87661+0+archive/2002/freebsd-libh/ > 20020609.freebsd-libh > > That's a great deal - the portversion is only used as symbolics to ppl > can differentiate it, and we only use the ports' serial for upgrade/undo > checks. I'm in favor of it :) Hmm.. What I did is the opposite: i made the Feature scheme as to allow people to use *only* the regular version to record package versionning, so that people don't have to use cryptic serial numbers or snapshot dates to differentiate between their package versions. Also, if the regular version is purely advisory, people are going to be *really* confused when they'll see that ls-1.1 > ls-1.2 because their serial numbers are different. The idea is to try to avoid these kind of situations by making the serial number an exception rather than the rule: "don't use it unless you have to. You *can* rely on version checking or snapshot date, in some cases. But only in desperate cases should you fall back to using serial numbers". In other words, the serial number is the PORTEPOCH equivalent. All powerful hammer, don't use it too often, because it's confusing. Therefore, if we use regular versions for comparisons, we need a proper way to compare them, and we therefore need a stricter format for it. > btw, the current version consistency check doesn't work. "1.10" is > reported as "invalid" version. Uh... I thought I tested that pretty thoroughly... There are regression tests in bin/regression. Are they still passed? I'll take a look at it tonight. A. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-libh" in the body of the message