Date: Mon, 17 May 2004 13:40:12 -0700 (PDT) From: Kirill Ponomarew <krion@voodoo.oberon.net> To: freebsd-doc@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: docs/66775: Clarification that port names should not contain version numbers Message-ID: <200405172040.i4HKeCUl029150@freefall.freebsd.org>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
The following reply was made to PR docs/66775; it has been noted by GNATS. From: Kirill Ponomarew <krion@voodoo.oberon.net> To: Oliver Eikemeier <eikemeier@fillmore-labs.com> Cc: freebsd-gnats-submit@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: docs/66775: Clarification that port names should not contain version numbers Date: Mon, 17 May 2004 22:33:08 +0200 --FLPM4o+7JoHGki3m Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi, On Mon, May 17, 2004 at 10:17:31PM +0200, Oliver Eikemeier wrote: =20 > The Committers Guide > <http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/articles/committers-guide/p= orts.html#Q12.2.3.> > has the following sentence: >=20 > "Upgrade the copied port to the new version (remember to change the POR= TNAME=20 > so there are not duplicate ports with the same name)." >=20 > Which should probably read >=20 > "Upgrade the copied port to the new version (remember to change the LAT= EST_LINK=20 > so there are not duplicate ports with the same name)." >=20 > since changing the ports name is usually a bad idea. There are cases when ports have to be renamed, I don't think LATEST_LINK could help in this situation. Why don't propose to use both, depending on purpose ? -Kirill --FLPM4o+7JoHGki3m Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQFAqSGEQC1G6a60JuURAstuAKDgeLlMc7Sk9HERjsmmct2iKMH3dACcCGev QLvCSiNe5PGB6HMf5wXnS74= =2Ba/ -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --FLPM4o+7JoHGki3m--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200405172040.i4HKeCUl029150>