Date: Thu, 30 Mar 2000 17:20:31 -0800 From: "David O'Brien" <obrien@FreeBSD.org> To: Kris Kennaway <kris@FreeBSD.org> Cc: Satoshi Asami <asami@FreeBSD.org>, ports@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: final call: VERSION variable Message-ID: <20000330172031.A59713@dragon.nuxi.com> In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.4.21.0003292033520.32828-100000@freefall.freebsd.org>; from kris@FreeBSD.org on Wed, Mar 29, 2000 at 08:38:22PM -0800 References: <200003300345.TAA12994@silvia.hip.berkeley.edu> <Pine.BSF.4.21.0003292033520.32828-100000@freefall.freebsd.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, Mar 29, 2000 at 08:38:22PM -0800, Kris Kennaway wrote: > Ultimately we should have a PORTVERSION as well, which gets incremented > whenever someone makes a change to a port, e.g. fixing a bug with a patch, > enabling a new feature, etc. It would be reset to 1 whenever the distfile > version is increased. Ports could then depend on a specific FreeBSD > version of a port (e.g. we fix a bug in libfoo which was breaking the > mumble port), etc. This sounds like a LOT of EXTRA useless work -- much like updating the useless "Version requrired" comment. Can you show this a little more in a proof of concept? -- -- David (obrien@NUXI.com) 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?20000330172031.A59713>