From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Sep 27 07:50:36 2011 Return-Path: Delivered-To: current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1E0BA106566B; Tue, 27 Sep 2011 07:50:36 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from perryh@pluto.rain.com) Received: from agora.rdrop.com (agora.rdrop.com [IPv6:2607:f678:1010::34]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id ED7308FC14; Tue, 27 Sep 2011 07:50:35 +0000 (UTC) Received: from agora.rdrop.com (66@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by agora.rdrop.com (8.13.1/8.12.7) with ESMTP id p8R7oZs3083425 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT); Tue, 27 Sep 2011 00:50:35 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from perryh@pluto.rain.com) Received: (from uucp@localhost) by agora.rdrop.com (8.13.1/8.12.9/Submit) with UUCP id p8R7oYTC083424; Tue, 27 Sep 2011 00:50:34 -0700 (PDT) Received: from fbsd81 ([192.168.200.81]) by pluto.rain.com (4.1/SMI-4.1-pluto-M2060407) id AA13291; Tue, 27 Sep 11 00:47:12 PDT Date: Tue, 27 Sep 2011 07:46:30 -0700 From: perryh@pluto.rain.com To: ade@freebsd.org Message-Id: <4e81e1c6.gA+ZK1BK2KFWANDY%perryh@pluto.rain.com> References: <20110926230335.041fd9aa@lab.lovett.com> <20110927012902.2ebb4a3e@lab.lovett.com> In-Reply-To: <20110927012902.2ebb4a3e@lab.lovett.com> User-Agent: nail 11.25 7/29/05 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailman-Approved-At: Tue, 27 Sep 2011 11:19:32 +0000 Cc: ports@freebsd.org, current@freebsd.org Subject: outside the box (Re: HEADS UP: ports/ and 10.0-CURRENT) X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 27 Sep 2011 07:50:36 -0000 Ade Lovett wrote: > The undeniable fact is that configure scripts in general have > chosen to do things a certain way. Unfortunately for us (us > being FreeBSD), we have now broken these conceptions by moving > to a dual-digit major release. I don't suppose REVISION="A.1" i.e. using a single hex digit instead of two decimal digits, would work any better :) (IIRC alphas do sort after numerics, at least in the C locale.)