From owner-freebsd-ports Sat Jun 21 07:43:38 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id HAA01213 for ports-outgoing; Sat, 21 Jun 1997 07:43:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: from fallout.campusview.indiana.edu (fallout.campusview.indiana.edu [149.159.1.1]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id HAA01205 for ; Sat, 21 Jun 1997 07:43:34 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (jfieber@localhost) by fallout.campusview.indiana.edu (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id JAA16490 for ; Sat, 21 Jun 1997 09:43:32 -0500 (EST) Date: Sat, 21 Jun 1997 09:43:32 -0500 (EST) From: John Fieber To: ports@freebsd.org Subject: Multiple versions of a ported item Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-ports@freebsd.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk Most ports that I'm aware of are of the type where you typically have one version installed. If an upgrade comes along, you either remove the old version and install the new, or just lay the new on top of the old. Even where distinct versions of a port exist, eg netscape3 and netscape4, you can really can only have one installed at a time. In moving SGML tools into port form, I've run into the situation where it is desirable to have multiple versions of a port installed simultaneously, for example several versions of the HTML or DocBook DTDs. I'm not sure how would be the best way to deal with this. Should there be separate ports for each version, or would it be better to have one port including all versions? I'm sort of leaning toward the latter because the former could generate a lot of ports and the space demands of including all versions isn't very big. Other opinions? -john