Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Wed, 30 Sep 2015 14:14:15 +0300
From:      Arto Pekkanen <isoa@kapsi.fi>
To:        Baptiste Daroussin <bapt@FreeBSD.org>, mfv <mfv@bway.net>
Cc:        freebsd-pkg@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: Suggestion to add build/revision number to "pkg stats"
Message-ID:  <560BC407.5020407@kapsi.fi>
In-Reply-To: <20150923215025.GM16800@ivaldir.etoilebsd.net>
References:  <20150916165829.46ba52f6@gecko4> <55FC6977.6010704@gmx.net> <20150922220600.GE16800@ivaldir.etoilebsd.net> <56027399.8040101@kapsi.fi> <20150923163731.70398452@gecko4> <20150923215025.GM16800@ivaldir.etoilebsd.net>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 4880 and 3156)
--v204uewaE9jRVFmNDJWPi9BUWAgva7LaK
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On 24.9.2015 0:50, Baptiste Daroussin wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 23, 2015 at 04:37:31PM -0400, mfv wrote:
>>
>> I've tried to sync the ports tree and packages based on a date but hav=
e
>> not been able to identify one.  However, between a date and a build
>> number my guilt feeling is that the latter is the safer option.
>=20
> Not if I take the date of the last commit of the revision we use except=
 that it
> won't work with portsnap but maybe we can find a trick there too.

Bapt, what you suggested would work perfectly.

Actually this is a better solution than what I suggested at first. Start =
of build date might be actually a bit off from the actual date of the lat=
est revision used for the build.

So, the date of latest revision of the ports tree that was used to build =
a repository would be certainly the best option to include in pkg stats.

But for now I will keep using the https://pkg-status.freebsd.org to deter=
mine the start of build time, as suggested by Marek. I do realize now tha=
t the start of build time might be a bit off from the actual date of late=
st revision the build was based on, but still it is closer than what I've=
 managed to determine thus far.


--v204uewaE9jRVFmNDJWPi9BUWAgva7LaK
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"
Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc"

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.19 (MingW32)

iF4EAREIAAYFAlYLxAoACgkQTBivhqtJa269wAD8DOdHzH09ii/kpsssTFC9eAby
PFLgn9G7nMvyVMC7lKEA/1WWL6T8gv8ll5nay4a/V1TlqTvDXhGqbD1uR2t0xRKj
=wlqX
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--v204uewaE9jRVFmNDJWPi9BUWAgva7LaK--



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?560BC407.5020407>