From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Jun 11 08:02:15 2015 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A505E21A for ; Thu, 11 Jun 2015 08:02:15 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from rhurlin@gwdg.de) Received: from fmailer.gwdg.de (fmailer.gwdg.de [134.76.11.16]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 64FD315E5 for ; Thu, 11 Jun 2015 08:02:14 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from rhurlin@gwdg.de) Received: from um-excht-a02.um.gwdg.de ([134.76.11.222] helo=email.gwdg.de) by mailer.gwdg.de with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1Z2xRE-0005hi-Nw; Thu, 11 Jun 2015 10:02:12 +0200 Received: from pc028.nfv (134.76.242.1) by email.gwdg.de (134.76.9.211) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.195.1; Thu, 11 Jun 2015 10:02:11 +0200 Message-ID: <55794083.1060707@gwdg.de> Date: Thu, 11 Jun 2015 10:02:11 +0200 From: Rainer Hurling User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; FreeBSD amd64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.7.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Euan Thoms CC: Subject: Re: New port with USES=gmake will not stage References: <72ad-55793c00-2d-6b8b4580@30728770> In-Reply-To: <72ad-55793c00-2d-6b8b4580@30728770> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Level: - X-Virus-Scanned: (clean) by clamav X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 11 Jun 2015 08:02:15 -0000 Am 11.06.2015 um 09:43 schrieb Euan Thoms: > > On Thursday, June 11, 2015 15:35 SGT, Rainer Hurling wrote: > >> >> I am wondering, if there is a small typo in your PORTNAME. Shouldn't it >> be 'opensips1-tls' instead of 'opensips1-lts' (lts -> tls)? >> >> And why do you use 'opensips1' instead of 'opensips'? PORTVERSION >> already includes the version number. It seems, this complicates the >> subsequent setting of WRKSRC etc ... >> > > No, it's not a typo. It's version 1.11.5 LTS (Long Term Support), so I named it opensips1-lts so that the current stable (v2.1.0) could be called opensips or opensips2. In other words I'm thinking further down the line. But I'm personally most interested in a LTS branch. I needs the upgrade stability, rather than new features. > Thanks for the clarification and sorry to bother you with these issues.