Date: Mon, 1 May 2006 21:38:51 +0200 From: Kirill Ponomarew <krion@voodoo.bawue.com> To: Andrew Pantyukhin <infofarmer@gmail.com> Cc: FreeBSD Ports <ports@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: portversion and distversion - why not? Message-ID: <20060501193851.GA54315@voodoo.bawue.com> In-Reply-To: <cb5206420605011232j5cff24c4hea0e41e3a7493bef@mail.gmail.com> References: <cb5206420605011232j5cff24c4hea0e41e3a7493bef@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, May 01, 2006 at 11:32:55PM +0400, Andrew Pantyukhin wrote: > Portlint says: > FATAL: Makefile: either PORTVERSION or DISTVERSION must be specified, not > both. > > Can somebody please explain why? It comes in handy > to be able to define illegal distversion instead of redefining > the whole distname. B.p.m was designed to handle two > different variables in the first place. Should we really > abstain from using this functionality? DISTVERSION is just conform conversion of PORTVERSION, I don't see a reason to specify both. -Kirill
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20060501193851.GA54315>