Date: Mon, 1 May 2006 23:34:26 +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: <20060501213426.GB54315@voodoo.bawue.com> In-Reply-To: <cb5206420605011306l6f16510dr7181e01f28499939@mail.gmail.com> References: <cb5206420605011232j5cff24c4hea0e41e3a7493bef@mail.gmail.com> <20060501193851.GA54315@voodoo.bawue.com> <cb5206420605011306l6f16510dr7181e01f28499939@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, May 02, 2006 at 12:06:54AM +0400, Andrew Pantyukhin wrote: > On 5/1/06, Kirill Ponomarew <krion@voodoo.bawue.com> 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, 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. > > grrr > > To quote bpm: > PORTVERSION - Version of software. Mandatory when no DISTVERSION is > given. > 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? Hehe, I can still remember why I committed it into bpm, DISTVERSION was invented to remove the "bogus" port versions like '10Beta2-pre', '20Alpha1', '30_1_20' etc, and convert them into more logical numbers like '10.b2.p', '20.a1', '30.1.20' etc. Therefore I don't quite follow why to have, say, PORTVERSION=10Beta2-pre and DISTVERSION=10Beta2-pre with each other. DISTVERSION actually was *not* intended for the purpose of downloading and building the software. -Kirill
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20060501213426.GB54315>