From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Mon May 1 20:06:58 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ports@freebsd.org 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 A38E216A459 for ; Mon, 1 May 2006 20:06:58 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from infofarmer@gmail.com) Received: from nz-out-0102.google.com (nz-out-0102.google.com [64.233.162.207]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A4DFB43D58 for ; Mon, 1 May 2006 20:06:57 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from infofarmer@gmail.com) Received: by nz-out-0102.google.com with SMTP id x3so2926550nzd for ; Mon, 01 May 2006 13:06:57 -0700 (PDT) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=EJwvJO847gZ1beho4uW7AVXY44IO5819WWwFmBrIWHhL7sKI7Wn2Oka2tINkKRUdCq7dMTnKyD6SPBaaVXpv3O0dlWVQBEy4cZ3r+VLrkQROGLdlz50W5FAgh2UpfydncE1F6RRC/XvVvhzyhs0RMLaS8DJs0P/ihj5c8Lu3xPc= Received: by 10.36.247.20 with SMTP id u20mr1421440nzh; Mon, 01 May 2006 13:06:57 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.37.22.74 with HTTP; Mon, 1 May 2006 13:06:54 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: Date: Tue, 2 May 2006 00:06:54 +0400 From: "Andrew Pantyukhin" To: "Kirill Ponomarew" In-Reply-To: <20060501193851.GA54315@voodoo.bawue.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline References: <20060501193851.GA54315@voodoo.bawue.com> Cc: FreeBSD Ports Subject: Re: portversion and distversion - why not? X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 01 May 2006 20:06:58 -0000 On 5/1/06, Kirill Ponomarew wrote: > On Mon, May 01, 2006 at 11:32:55PM +0400, Andrew Pantyukhin wrote: > > Portlint says: > > FATAL: Makefile: either PORTVERSION or DISTVERSION must be specified, n= ot > > 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. grrr To quote bpm: PORTVERSION - Version of software. Mandatory when no DISTVERSION is give= n. DISTVERSION - Vendor version of the distribution. Now what's so hard to understand here? Portversion is nice and legal, it tries to increase from version to version, it follows a number of guidelines imposed by FreeBSD. Now distversion - is something from vendor's imagination. It can contain a multitude of not very nice characters, long strings, bad syntax; it can stay the same across releases (e.g. when subdir is changing), it can go back and forth... Portversion is the version that users and the system see Distversion is actually _just_ for the purpose of downloading and building the software Conversions between them (both directions are defined in bpm) are only to ease our live, they do not happen if both *versions are defined. What's so fatal if we use both, huh?