From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Oct 27 16:45:39 2003 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 206C516A5E2; Mon, 27 Oct 2003 16:45:29 -0800 (PST) Received: from obsecurity.dyndns.org (adsl-63-207-60-234.dsl.lsan03.pacbell.net [63.207.60.234]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1BBD54429B; Mon, 27 Oct 2003 15:52:01 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from kris@obsecurity.org) Received: from rot13.obsecurity.org (rot13.obsecurity.org [10.0.0.5]) by obsecurity.dyndns.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E056F66B9B; Mon, 27 Oct 2003 15:52:00 -0800 (PST) Received: by rot13.obsecurity.org (Postfix, from userid 1000) id B5F13DBC; Mon, 27 Oct 2003 15:52:00 -0800 (PST) Date: Mon, 27 Oct 2003 15:52:00 -0800 From: Kris Kennaway To: Oliver Eikemeier Message-ID: <20031027235200.GA17774@rot13.obsecurity.org> References: <200310272118.h9RLIOmJ076007@freefall.freebsd.org> <3F9DA174.6050000@fillmore-labs.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="uAKRQypu60I7Lcqm" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <3F9DA174.6050000@fillmore-labs.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i cc: FreeBSD ports cc: Doug Barton Subject: Re: ports/58588: port dns/bind9: PORTEPOCH must be increased X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 28 Oct 2003 00:45:39 -0000 --uAKRQypu60I7Lcqm Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Mon, Oct 27, 2003 at 11:51:32PM +0100, Oliver Eikemeier wrote: > Doug Barton wrote: >=20 > >Synopsis: port dns/bind9: PORTEPOCH must be increased > > > >State-Changed-From-To: open->closed > >State-Changed-By: dougb > >State-Changed-When: Mon Oct 27 13:16:17 PST 2003 > >State-Changed-Why:=20 > > > >I can't be responsible for the problems of other ports. :) > >The ports system won't allow 9.2.3rc4 as a version, and the > >other tools choke on 9.2.3.4 < 9.2.3, and I'm definitely not > >going to update portepoch, so the solutio has to be found > >elsewhere. > > > >http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=3D58588 >=20 > That's the way the port tools work. The FreeBSD Porter's Handbook > recommends using 9.2.3.r4 for 9.2.3rc4: > http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/porters-handbook/makefi= le-naming.html > and indeed: > # pkg_version -t 9.2.3.r4 9.2.3 > < >=20 > People using portupgrade are missing the update to the release > version. What is the problem with bumping the PORTEPOCH? Oliver's right..the version numbering system is standard across the Ports collection, and it is an error for the port revision of a port to ever go backwards according to the rules encoded in pkg_version -t. Kris --uAKRQypu60I7Lcqm Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.3 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQE/na+gWry0BWjoQKURAp7RAJ9blhhrFNM2SSp8CdvPfNwTWOrY6wCgy49Y gp0a8/UtWWhttJCozF/ZYfs= =Dusd -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --uAKRQypu60I7Lcqm--