Date: Thu, 6 Jun 2002 09:49:38 +0200 From: Alexander Langer <alex@big.endian.de> To: Jordan K Hubbard <jkh@queasyweasel.com> Cc: The Anarcat <anarcat@anarcat.ath.cx>, libh@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: "Standard" version numbers (Re: SYSTEM package contradictions) Message-ID: <20020606094938.G800@fump.kawo2.rwth-aachen.de> In-Reply-To: <3A161044-777D-11D6-BE49-0003938C7B7E@queasyweasel.com>; from jkh@queasyweasel.com on Mon, Jun 03, 2002 at 10:37:58PM -0700 References: <20020603145655.GB543@lenny.anarcat.ath.cx> <3A161044-777D-11D6-BE49-0003938C7B7E@queasyweasel.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Thus spake Jordan K Hubbard (jkh@queasyweasel.com): > I guess we were being optimistic on the regular version thing. I don't > see any problem with going to a unique serial number instead and making > the version number, if available, purely advisory. I guess "regular version" is something like for the ispell ports with lanuage sets enabled. The ispell version would be the "regular" version, and the version of the language sets would be a sub-version or so. But I don't know for sure. A serial # would be more wise maybe. Alex To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-libh" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20020606094938.G800>