From owner-cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG  Sat May 22 08:13:34 2010
Return-Path: <owner-cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: cvs-all@freebsd.org
Received: by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix, from userid 1033)
	id B90A61065676; Sat, 22 May 2010 08:13:34 +0000 (UTC)
Date: Sat, 22 May 2010 08:13:34 +0000
From: Alexey Dokuchaev <danfe@FreeBSD.org>
To: Giorgos Keramidas <keramida@freebsd.org>
Message-ID: <20100522081334.GA16276@FreeBSD.org>
References: <201005211951.o4LJp46e084250@repoman.freebsd.org>
	<yge1vd4h5zr.wl%ume@mahoroba.org> <87bpc832m4.fsf@kobe.laptop>
	<20100522063751.GA87869@FreeBSD.org> <87y6fc1jxd.fsf@kobe.laptop>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=koi8-r
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <87y6fc1jxd.fsf@kobe.laptop>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.1i
Cc: cvs-ports@freebsd.org, Hajimu UMEMOTO <ume@freebsd.org>,
	cvs-all@freebsd.org, ports-committers@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: cvs commit: ports/editors/emacs Makefile
X-BeenThere: cvs-all@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: **OBSOLETE** CVS commit messages for the entire tree
	<cvs-all.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/cvs-all>,
	<mailto:cvs-all-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/cvs-all>
List-Post: <mailto:cvs-all@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:cvs-all-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/cvs-all>,
	<mailto:cvs-all-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 22 May 2010 08:13:34 -0000

On Sat, May 22, 2010 at 10:21:02AM +0300, Giorgos Keramidas wrote:
> On Sat, 22 May 2010 06:37:51 +0000, Alexey Dokuchaev wrote:
> > On Sat, May 22, 2010 at 08:52:03AM +0300, Giorgos Keramidas wrote:
> >> Does this patch look ok?
> >
> > No, it does not.  PORTEPOCH could never go backwards or be reset.  It is
> > the way we deal when version scheme changes so "newer" version is less
> > than "old", or when for some reason port must be downgraded (yes, these
> > things happen from time to time).
> >
> > You should have bumped PORTREVISION (wraps every version update, thus
> > being cheap), but now it's probably too late: accidental errors like
> > this should normally be reverted in a matter of minutes.
> >
> > Please refer to relevant PHB chapters for gory details, and be careful
> > next time.
> 
> Argh.  So can we just commit the bsd.port.pre.mk bits?  The OSVERSION
> check is important for 6.X users.

Yeah, I guess they can be committed.  But better ask maintainer first.
I merely commented on PORTEPOCH vs. PORTREVISION issue.

./danfe