PORTVERSION=1.0.0b

[Matthew Seaman]

On 20/05/2012 14:41, Michael Scheidell wrote:
> I seem to remember some discussion on using numeric only, and not alpha
> in PORTVERSION string, and would like to address this with maintainer
> unless its just my faulty memory mixing up PORTVERSION/REVISION.
> 
> only thing I found ~seems~ to indicate using alpha is ok:
> 
> <http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en/books/porters-handbook/makefile-naming.html#AEN504>
> 
> portlint -abt doesn't complain, but it is a 'new port' and I don't want
> it to start out life with something that will garner larts,pavmail or
> other wise generate public flogging once I commit it.

Try setting DISTVERSION=1.0.0b and let the ports generate PORTVERSION
automatically.  You can have alpha-characters in a PORTVERSION string,
but not any arbitrary combination thereof -- I think the rule is
something like zero or more decimal digits followed by zero or one alpha
characters is allowed as the content of the last (dot delimited) field
in the version string.  BICBW.  PORTREVISION has to be numeric.

	Cheers,

	Matthew

-- 
Dr Matthew J Seaman MA, D.Phil.                   7 Priory Courtyard
                                                  Flat 3
PGP: http://www.infracaninophile.co.uk/pgpkey     Ramsgate
JID: matthew at infracaninophile.co.uk               Kent, CT11 9PW

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 267 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
Url : http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-ports/attachments/20120520/dffc8b4b/signature.pgp