Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Fri, 8 Feb 2013 22:51:07 +0200
From:      Kimmo Paasiala <kpaasial@gmail.com>
To:        mexas@bristol.ac.uk
Cc:        bf1783@gmail.com, freebsd-ports@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: how to move 9.1 ports to HEAD?
Message-ID:  <CA%2B7WWSfF=Vz3zsS-Z0wkPCSvVy0TPJOwFDSHNzTd3Pb4bQaUaw@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CA%2B7WWSde%2BgbpXnGTSpe-Jx6fErYbtN=s5oSdr1KqoD0=STnUxg@mail.gmail.com>
References:  <201302082017.r18KHk7k036221@mech-cluster241.men.bris.ac.uk> <CA%2B7WWSde%2BgbpXnGTSpe-Jx6fErYbtN=s5oSdr1KqoD0=STnUxg@mail.gmail.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Fri, Feb 8, 2013 at 10:45 PM, Kimmo Paasiala <kpaasial@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 8, 2013 at 10:17 PM, Anton Shterenlikht <mexas@bristol.ac.uk> wrote:
>>         From bf1783@googlemail.com Fri Feb  8 17:33:09 2013
>>
>>         > >  I don't think it's true.
>>         > >  While still on 9.1 ports, the latest
>>         > >  entry in UPDATING was (well I lost it now)
>>         > >  about NOV-2012. I believe the revision was
>>         > >  also substantially lower.
>>         > >
>>         > >  AS soon as I switched to head,
>>         > >  the latest entry in UPDATING is from
>>         > >  6-FEB-2013 and the revision is 311942.
>>         > >
>>         > >  Or maybe I misunderstood you?
>>         >
>>         >         You do.  :-)
>>         >         The local _subversion repository_ (I know I'm using incorrent
>>         > terminology) has a revision number: r######.  Which is the same
>>         > across different versions of FreeBSD.
>>         >         The individual ports _maintained within that repository_ have
>>         > their individual ports numbers (e.g. libreoffice-3.6.5) ... which
>>         > also does not vary with the FreeBSD release.  One can have
>>         > libreoffice-3.6.5 and libreoffice 3.5.4 - but those are two separate
>>         > ports and both work (or should) on 8.3, 9.1, and -CURRENT.  If a
>>         > port has a minimum (or maximum) release of the OS it supports, there
>>         > a mechanism for figuring that out and DTRT.
>>         >
>>         >         Or did I misunderstand you?
>>
>>         Yes, it is now branched, and he was probably using the equivalent of:
>>
>>         http://svnweb.FreeBSD.org/ports/branches/RELENG_9_1_0/
>>
>>         rather than
>>
>>         http://svnweb.FreeBSD.org/ports/head/
>>
>>         By the way, Anton, you may wish to use https:// rather than svn:// --
>>         slightly less efficient, but more secure.
>>
>> yes, got it, cool!
>>
>> root@zzz:/root # svn info /usr/ports/
>> Path: /usr/ports
>> Working Copy Root Path: /usr/ports
>> URL: https://svn0.us-east.freebsd.org/ports/head
>> Repository Root: https://svn0.us-east.freebsd.org/ports
>> Repository UUID: 35697150-7ecd-e111-bb59-0022644237b5
>> Revision: 311950
>> Node Kind: directory
>> Schedule: normal
>> Last Changed Author: eadler
>> Last Changed Rev: 311950
>> Last Changed Date: 2013-02-08 19:18:40 +0000 (Fri, 08 Feb 2013)
>>
>> root@zzz:/root #
>>
>> Does svn://svn.freebsd.org/base/head
>> support https too?
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>> Anton
>>
>>
>
> Just to repeat what others have tried to tell you. The ports tree is
> NOT branched. The branches/RELENG_9_1_0 thing is a "tag" in subversion
> terminology, a read only-snapshot of head from the time the release
> was made that will never be updated.
>
> -Kimmo

Actually I'm talking slightly rubbish here, the tags are in the tags/*
part of the repository, for example
http://svn.freebsd.org/ports/tags/RELEASE_9_1_0. The
branches/RELENG_9_1_0 thing is a proper branch but since there's no
announcement of what it should used for I would guess it's someone's
test branch.

-Kimmo



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CA%2B7WWSfF=Vz3zsS-Z0wkPCSvVy0TPJOwFDSHNzTd3Pb4bQaUaw>