FreeBSD-10 -> FreeBSD-9.9 ?

[Mark Andrews]

In message <20111025184523.GC47524 at dragon.NUXI.org>, "David O'Brien" writes:
> On Tue, Oct 25, 2011 at 09:18:28AM +0200, Hans Petter Selasky wrote:
> > On Tuesday 25 October 2011 01:06:23 David O'Brien wrote:
> > > On Mon, Oct 10, 2011 at 11:04:13AM +0800, Adrian Chadd wrote:
> > > > Just an idle comment - why don't we just rename FreeBSD-10 to
> > > > FreeBSD-9.9 for now, and give the ports/developers some time to "fix"
> > > > bad autoconf/automake scripts?
> > > > That way -current can still be used for testing/development.
> > > 
> > > I figured someone else would respond by now...
> > > 
> > > \aol{me too!}
> > > 
> > > (though I suggest 9.99 as a value we'd never hit)
> > > 
> > > I've made this change on all my local systems.
> > 
> > Why not use 9.5.x ?
> > Whould give more number space to increment?
> 
> Eh?  Sorry I don't follow -- why do we need to increment?
> 
> "9.99" is a temperary work around to buy us just a few months time to fix
> ports.  Such a band-aid should not exist long enough to need to increment
> anything.
> 
> We mostly just need to not fall into things like:
> 
>     case $host_os in
>     [...]
>     freebsd1*)
>       ld_shlibs=no
>       ;;
>     [...]
> 
> in 'configure'.

Ok, so what's the minimum versions of the auto* and libtoo* that are
fixed so I can ship BIND9 w/o freebsd1*) in configure?   If I need to
bump the tool versions I want to do it once.

Mark
-- 
Mark Andrews, ISC
1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia
PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742                 INTERNET: marka at isc.org