From owner-cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Jan 25 00:18:07 2005 Return-Path: Delivered-To: cvs-all@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 96E5116A4CE; Tue, 25 Jan 2005 00:18:07 +0000 (GMT) Received: from melon.pingpong.net (82.milagro.bahnhof.net [195.178.168.82]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D4AE243D45; Tue, 25 Jan 2005 00:18:06 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from girgen@FreeBSD.org) Received: from localhost (localhost.pingpong.net [127.0.0.1]) by melon.pingpong.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id B7BC44AC3A; Tue, 25 Jan 2005 01:18:05 +0100 (CET) Received: from melon.pingpong.net ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (melon.pingpong.net [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id 07518-01-4; Tue, 25 Jan 2005 01:18:05 +0100 (CET) Received: from palle.girgensohn.se (1-2-8-5a.asp.sth.bostream.se [82.182.157.66]) by melon.pingpong.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6621F4AC33; Tue, 25 Jan 2005 01:18:05 +0100 (CET) Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2005 01:18:05 +0100 From: Palle Girgensohn To: "Jacques A. Vidrine" Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <20050124162223.GM3960@lum.celabo.org> References: <20050123100627.35E4716A501@hub.freebsd.org> <3FB436057021D7C93416454A@cc-147.int.t-online.fr> <20050124162223.GM3960@lum.celabo.org> X-Mailer: Mulberry/3.1.6 (Linux/x86) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at pingpong.net cc: Mathieu Arnold cc: Sean Chittenden cc: cvs-ports@FreeBSD.org cc: cvs-all@FreeBSD.org cc: ports-committers@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: ports UPDATING ports/databases/postgresql-devel Makefile distinfo pkg-plist ports/databases/postgresql80-server Makefile X-BeenThere: cvs-all@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: CVS commit messages for the entire tree List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2005 00:18:08 -0000 --On m=E5ndag, januari 24, 2005 10.22.23 -0600 "Jacques A. Vidrine"=20 wrote: > On Mon, Jan 24, 2005 at 03:43:40PM +0100, Palle Girgensohn wrote: >> >> >> --On s=F6ndag, januari 23, 2005 11.22.50 +0100 Mathieu Arnold >> wrote: >> >> > +-le 23/01/2005 10:06 +0000, Sean Chittenden =E9crivait : >> >| seanc 2005-01-23 10:06:21 UTC >> >| Port epoch bumped because 8.0.rc* is greater than 8.0.0. >> > >> > Note quite sure about that : >> > $ pkg_version -t 8.0.rc5.2005.01.16 8.0.0 >> > < >> >> Uh, 4.10 differs from 5.3 here: >> >> FreeBSD 4.10$ pkg_version -t 8.0.0rc5 8.0.0 >> > >> FreeBSD 4.10$ pkg_version -t 8.0rc5.2005.01.16 8.0.0 >> > >> >> FreeBSD 5.3$ pkg_version -t 8.0.0rc5 8.0.0 >> < >> FreeBSD 5.3$ pkg_version -t 8.0rc5.2005.01.16 8.0.0 >> < > > This is partially pilot error. Note that "8.0.rc5" and "8.0rc5" are > really completely different versions. > > Unfortunately, this was changed by revision 1.5 of > src/usr.sbin/pkg_install/lib/version.c: several strings including "rc" > are now handled specially in direct contradiction of our documented > Package Naming Conventions. I think the change was wrong and > insufficiently reviewed, but it is too late now. > > Of course, ports that actually correctly follow the Porter's Handbook > never be named such that this makes a difference. In other words, the > Porter's Handbook recommends against names such as "8.0rc" or > "8.0beta" in favor of "8.0.r" and "8.0.b". True! I stand corrected. The documented Package Naming Conventions from the = Porter's Handbook should of course rule. But, the previous port version of postgresql-devel was 8.0.rc5.2005.01.16, = so it was actually not necessary to bump PORTEPOCH. Oh well, never mind,=20 too late now. You learn something everyday, I guess... :) FreeBSD 4.10$ pkg_version -t 8.0.0.rc5 8.0.0 < FreeBSD 4.10$ pkg_version -t 8.0.rc5.2005.01.16 8.0.0 < FreeBSD 5.3$ pkg_version -t 8.0.0.rc5 8.0.0 < FreeBSD 5.3$ pkg_version -t 8.0.rc5.2005.01.16 8.0.0 < Looks better. Although, it should really be .r5, not .rc5... ``No strings=20 like rc allowed'' according the handbook... >> portupgrade has it own algorithm. In conflict with pkg_version-5.3, >> it considers 8.0.0rc or even 8.0.0beta to be greater than 8.0.0. > > That's because portupgrade does the right thing and follows the > Porter's Handbook when it comes to version numbers. Seems correct. [snip...] >> I haven't checked if this is fixed in 4.11, but since it is not even = out, >> bumping port epoch is unfortunately necessary. :( > > It was not necessary--- you just made typos in your tests ("8.0.rc5", > not "8.0rc5"). However, it is now necessary that it stays. True. /Palle