From owner-freebsd-ports Mon Mar 12 14:16:24 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Received: from 200.227.201.97 (200-227-201-97-as.acessonet.com.br [200.227.201.97]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C8F8037B71A for ; Mon, 12 Mar 2001 14:16:17 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from lioux@uol.com.br) Received: (qmail 47347 invoked by uid 1001); 12 Mar 2001 22:15:34 -0000 From: "Mario Sergio Fujikawa Ferreira" Date: Mon, 12 Mar 2001 19:15:12 -0300 To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: PORTVERSION convention help Message-ID: <20010312191512.A47330@Fedaykin.here> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i Sender: owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Hi, I've just added ports/devel/understand_c with PORTVERSION=14b103 at 2001/03/09 It should be read as version 1.4 Build 103 I will be updating this port to version 1.4 Build 104 Therefore, I would use PORTVERSION=14b104 However, after some thought this seems unappropriate. What about PORTVERSION=1.4.b104? Or, should I use another combination such as PORTVERSION=1.4.104b? Or, 1.4.104? Or, should I maintain the former naming convention? If I change, I'll have to BUMP PORTEPOCH. I know this looks pretty academic but I thought I should ask. Regards, -- Mario S F Ferreira - UnB - Brazil - "I guess this is a signature." lioux at ( freebsd dot org | linf dot unb dot br ) flames to beloved devnull@someotherworldbeloworabove.org To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-ports" in the body of the message