Date: Thu, 28 Sep 2000 17:25:51 -0400 From: Bill Fumerola <billf@chimesnet.com> To: Kris Kennaway <kris@FreeBSD.org> Cc: David O'Brien <obrien@FreeBSD.org>, ports@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: Guidelines for new port version variables Message-ID: <20000928172551.G38472@jade.chc-chimes.com> In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.4.21.0009281415290.66918-100000@freefall.freebsd.org>; from kris@FreeBSD.org on Thu, Sep 28, 2000 at 02:19:51PM -0700 References: <20000928120548.A89733@dragon.nuxi.com> <Pine.BSF.4.21.0009281415290.66918-100000@freefall.freebsd.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, Sep 28, 2000 at 02:19:51PM -0700, Kris Kennaway wrote:
> The "_0" is implicit..I didnt think the extra spam on the majority of
> packages is needed - besides, it would not be backwards compatible unless
> your version parser understands the previous version anyway, at which
> point you've not made anything simpler by adding _0 explicitly.
> Well, the important thing IMO is registering changes within the port. The
> implicit "_0" means "the state of the port when this version was first
> imported". For example, when a new version is imported it still contains
> all or most of the previous patches (usually) - say for example the
> previous version was patched up to _2, and a new version is imported - it
> wouldn't be useful to start the next version off at _3, even though it's a
> heavily patched copy of the new vendor release.
100% agreement on both points. This is how I understood the system to work.
We won't have FreeBSD 4.2.1 just because we had a 4.1.1, and we won't have
FreeBSD 4.2.0, because the .0 is implied.
--
Bill Fumerola - Network Architect, BOFH / Chimes, Inc.
billf@chimesnet.com / billf@FreeBSD.org
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?20000928172551.G38472>