Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 17:53:55 -0800 From: "David O'Brien" <obrien@FreeBSD.org> To: Maxim Sobolev <sobomax@FreeBSD.org> Cc: marcus@marcuscom.com, freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: bison port Message-ID: <20011210175355.A2398@dragon.nuxi.com> In-Reply-To: <200112110134.DAA23251@ipcard.iptcom.net>; from sobomax@FreeBSD.org on Tue, Dec 11, 2001 at 03:34:07AM %2B0200 References: <20011210141716.A36250@dragon.nuxi.com> <200112110134.DAA23251@ipcard.iptcom.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, Dec 11, 2001 at 03:34:07AM +0200, Maxim Sobolev wrote: > On Mon, 10 Dec 2001 14:17:16 -0800, David O'Brien wrote: > > On Mon, Dec 10, 2001 at 05:12:19PM -0500, Joe Clarke wrote: > > > According to the Porter's Handbook, PORTEPOCH never goes away. This > > > number can never be decremented....unless you rename the port, I guess. > > > > I believe the assumption there is that the version number will never > > surpase some previous value. That is not the case here. > > No, there is no such assumption. PORTEPOCH needs to be increased > unconditionally each time when PORTREVISION for some reason is > decreased and should never be decreased (or deleted which simply sets > it to 0) even if underlying PORTVERSION has increased above the level > at which PORTEPOCH was introduced. Then I'm backing out the downgrade and we will just live with 1.30. This PORTEPOCH for life situation is stupid. Why can't it be removed? 1.31,0 is greater than 1.28,* To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-ports" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20011210175355.A2398>