From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG  Wed Dec 27 10:04:57 2006
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG>
X-Original-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org
Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1AF0B16A403;
	Wed, 27 Dec 2006 10:04:57 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from vd@datamax.bg)
Received: from jengal.datamax.bg (jengal.datamax.bg [82.103.104.21])
	by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C7EBC13C479;
	Wed, 27 Dec 2006 10:04:56 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from vd@datamax.bg)
Received: from qlovarnika.bg.datamax (qlovarnika.bg.datamax [192.168.10.2])
	by jengal.datamax.bg (Postfix) with SMTP id 0A1DFB84C;
	Wed, 27 Dec 2006 12:04:56 +0200 (EET)
Received: (nullmailer pid 6270 invoked by uid 1002);
	Wed, 27 Dec 2006 10:04:55 -0000
Date: Wed, 27 Dec 2006 12:04:55 +0200
From: Vasil Dimov <vd@FreeBSD.org>
To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org
Message-ID: <20061227100455.GA6003@qlovarnika.bg.datamax>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1;
	protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="sm4nu43k4a2Rpi4c"
Content-Disposition: inline
Cc: kuriyama@FreeBSD.org, sem@FreeBSD.org
Subject: portupgrade and gnupg update
X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
Reply-To: vd@FreeBSD.org
List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD <freebsd-ports.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports>,
	<mailto:freebsd-ports-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-ports>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-ports@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-ports-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports>,
	<mailto:freebsd-ports-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 27 Dec 2006 10:04:57 -0000


--sm4nu43k4a2Rpi4c
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Hi,

Currently I get this:

% portversion -v gnupg
gnupg-1.4.6_2               <  needs updating (port has 2.0.1)
gnupg-2.0.1                 =3D  up-to-date with port
%

This is incorrect and is caused by the fact that portupgrade is not
aware that security/gnupg has been moved to security/gnupg1.

If I apply the following patch:

Index: MOVED
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
RCS file: /usr/local/pcvs/ports/MOVED,v
retrieving revision 1.1225
diff -u -1 -r1.1225 MOVED
--- MOVED	26 Dec 2006 02:41:42 -0000	1.1225
+++ MOVED	27 Dec 2006 09:58:39 -0000
@@ -2617,2 +2617,3 @@
 devel/stlport-icc||2006-12-20|Has expired: does not work with stlport 4.6.2
+security/gnupg|security/gnupg1|2006-12-20|foobar
 security/gnupg-devel|security/gnupg|2006-12-21|gnupg-devel has been releas=
ed as Gnupg 2.0

I get this:

% portversion -v gnupg
gnupg-1.4.6_2               <  needs updating (port has 1.4.6_3) (=3D> 'sec=
urity/gnupg1')
gnupg-2.0.1                 >  succeeds port (port has 1.4.6_3) (=3D> 'secu=
rity/gnupg1')
%

which is weird... why does portversion think that gnupg-2.0.1 has
something to do with security/gnupg1?

--=20
Vasil Dimov
gro.DSBeerF@dv
%
A: Yes.
| Q: Are you sure?
| | A: Because it reverses the logical flow of conversation.
| | | Q: Why is top posting frowned upon?

--sm4nu43k4a2Rpi4c
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
Content-Disposition: inline

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

iD4DBQFFkkVHFw6SP/bBpCARAl7fAKCNaCCX69zmBrTvxeK0O3iakNVRYACTBbar
cFEr/d5SKTsNJ1rpE0592Q==
=h5a3
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--sm4nu43k4a2Rpi4c--