Date: Fri, 31 Jul 2009 16:10:32 -0700 From: Freddie Cash <fjwcash@gmail.com> To: ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: ports/*/jpeg "Thanks a lot guys" Message-ID: <b269bc570907311610g2e60d1cet5c704ba68757d17d@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <op.uxycfqw59aq2h7@localhost> References: <20090731121249.538ea7e7.jasonh@DataIX.net> <20090731173636.GA76357@owl.midgard.homeip.net> <op.uxycfqw59aq2h7@localhost>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Fri, Jul 31, 2009 at 2:53 PM, Jeremy Messenger <mezz7@cox.net> wrote: > On Fri, 31 Jul 2009 12:36:36 -0500, Erik Trulsson <ertr1013@student.uu.se> > wrote: > > On Fri, Jul 31, 2009 at 12:12:49PM -0400, Jason J. Hellenthal wrote: >> >>> >>> Now that I have finally upgraded my system in full from the last mix-up >>> with jpeg, You guys have bumped up every PORTREVISION that depends on >>> jpeg >>> "Great real great" Now I get to spend another three days fixing up some >>> more packages and rebuilding about 800+ ports. >>> >>> Thanks a whole lot. >>> >> >> Nobody is forcing you to rebuild your ports just because the PORTREVISION >> was bumped. If everything works fine for you there is actually no good >> reason at all to do so. >> > > Yes, but how can you tell if there is newer version? The pkg_version and > pkgversion don't tell you that it's PORTREVISION or actually newer version. > What about when we run 'port* -a'? Took about two weeks to get PORTREVISION > bump isn't right at all. > Yes it does. If the version numbers are the same, but the _X number is different, then it's a PORTREVISION change only. 2.4.1_1 vs 2.4.1_2 is a port revision bump. 2.4.1_1 vs 2.4.2 is a version change. X.Y.Z are the PORTVERSION. _A is the PORTREVISION ,B is the PORTEPOCH Giving a total version string of X.Y.Z_A,B -- Freddie Cash fjwcash@gmail.com
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?b269bc570907311610g2e60d1cet5c704ba68757d17d>