Date: Fri, 31 Mar 2000 14:10:36 +0200 From: Neil Blakey-Milner <nbm@mithrandr.moria.org> To: David O'Brien <obrien@FreeBSD.org> Cc: Kris Kennaway <kris@FreeBSD.org>, Satoshi Asami <asami@FreeBSD.org>, ports@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: final call: VERSION variable Message-ID: <20000331141036.A66257@mithrandr.moria.org> In-Reply-To: <20000330172031.A59713@dragon.nuxi.com> References: <200003300345.TAA12994@silvia.hip.berkeley.edu> <Pine.BSF.4.21.0003292033520.32828-100000@freefall.freebsd.org> <20000330172031.A59713@dragon.nuxi.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu 2000-03-30 (17:20), David O'Brien wrote: > On Wed, Mar 29, 2000 at 08:38:22PM -0800, Kris Kennaway wrote: > > Ultimately we should have a PORTVERSION as well, which gets incremented > > whenever someone makes a change to a port, e.g. fixing a bug with a patch, > > enabling a new feature, etc. It would be reset to 1 whenever the distfile > > version is increased. Ports could then depend on a specific FreeBSD > > version of a port (e.g. we fix a bug in libfoo which was breaking the > > mumble port), etc. > > This sounds like a LOT of EXTRA useless work -- much like updating the > useless "Version requrired" comment. > > Can you show this a little more in a proof of concept? If we upgrade the dependencies of a port, that port version doesn't change. That change should be reflected somehow. Neil -- Neil Blakey-Milner nbm@rucus.ru.ac.za To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-ports" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20000331141036.A66257>