From owner-freebsd-ports Thu Nov 15 10:32:52 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Received: from alcatraz.iptelecom.net.ua (alcatraz.iptelecom.net.ua [212.9.224.15]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E398D37B431; Thu, 15 Nov 2001 10:32:26 -0800 (PST) Received: from ipcard.iptcom.net (ipcard.iptcom.net [212.9.224.5]) by alcatraz.iptelecom.net.ua (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id UAA03689; Thu, 15 Nov 2001 20:32:21 +0200 (EET) (envelope-from sobomax@FreeBSD.org) Received: from vega.vega.com (h79.229.dialup.iptcom.net [212.9.229.79]) by ipcard.iptcom.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id UAA15165; Thu, 15 Nov 2001 20:32:18 +0200 (EET) (envelope-from sobomax@FreeBSD.org) Received: from FreeBSD.org (big_brother.vega.com [192.168.1.1]) by vega.vega.com (8.11.6/8.11.3) with ESMTP id fAFIVlY39172; Thu, 15 Nov 2001 20:31:47 +0200 (EET) (envelope-from sobomax@FreeBSD.org) Message-ID: <3BF40A9C.F4A2394D@FreeBSD.org> Date: Thu, 15 Nov 2001 20:34:04 +0200 From: Maxim Sobolev Organization: Vega International Capital X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.78 [en] (Windows NT 5.0; U) X-Accept-Language: en,uk,ru MIME-Version: 1.0 To: obrien@FreeBSD.org Cc: Marcel Moolenaar , Andreas Klemm , ports@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: PORTVERSION=6.1 wrong in linux_base-62 ??? References: <20011112060014.GA489@titan.klemm.gtn.com> <20011111232603.A14074@athlon.pn.xcllnt.net> <20011115090311.C2084@dragon.nuxi.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=koi8-r Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.org David O'Brien wrote: > > On Sun, Nov 11, 2001 at 11:26:03PM -0800, Marcel Moolenaar wrote: > > On Mon, Nov 12, 2001 at 07:00:14AM +0100, Andreas Klemm wrote: > > > We have 3 linux_base ports: > > > > > > linux_base with PORTVERSION=6.1 > > > linux_base-6.2 with PORTVERSION=6.1 > > > linux_base with PORTVERSION=7 > > > > > > I think PORTVERSION has to be 6.2 in linux_base-6.2, or ? > > > > I think linux_base-6.2 should not have been created. There was > > no reason for... > > Yes there is. The "plain" port name should be the latest-and-greatest > port. Do you plan for the 6.2 version to last for a very long time, > beside the 7.1 version? If so, then both ports should have a version > number (ie, like StarOffice, where there are strong reasons for the > separation). For linux_base, I don't see that need. The 7.1 version > should include any needed 6.2 "compat" libs(bits). Unfortunately it doesn't work that way. For example, I've tried to make linux-jdk working with linux_base-7 (installed RedHat's compat package for 7.1), but failed miserably. I suspect that many other linux ports will have the same problems. > Satoshi used to keep things clean along these lines, but with his absence > has come mayhem. Are you going to replace him? I would be glad if you do, otherwise I do not see much sense in such whining. -Maxim To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-ports" in the body of the message