port versions

[Fernan Aguero]

+----[ Ion-Mihai Tetcu <itetcu at people.tecnik93.com> (18.Jan.2005 22:33):
|
| > Since we're on the subject, I was wondering about other conventions
| > for port versions.  Sometimes it's "_1" or "_2" and sometimes it's
| > like "p5-DBD-mysql40-2.9004_1".  Is there any reason for all these, or
| > are they just left to the variable discretion of the port maintainer?
| 
| No. Reason:
| 
| /usr/share/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/porters-handbook/makefile-naming.html
|
+----]

I don't have it by that name, but under
/usr/share/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/porters-handbook/x400.html

As already explained in a previous message, everything that
is added after the port version, either in the package name
or when registering the port (usually in /var/db/pkg), come
from different variables defined in the ports Makefile

PORTNAME=	abc
PORTVERSION=	x gets added after portname as -x (abc-x)
PORTREVISION=	y  gets added as _y (abc-x_y)
PORTEPOCH=	z  gets added as ,z (abc-x_y,z)

Fernan