LATEST_LINK not in index

[Dominic Fandrey]

Pav Lucistnik wrote:
> Dominic Fandrey píše v so 28. 03. 2009 v 19:23 +0100:
> 
>> I'm working on a binary package upgrade tool that gets all required
>> information from the INDEX file downloadable from the package
>> repositories. This means you do not need a local copy of the ports
>> tree to use it.
>>
>> The only information required and missing is the LATEST_LINK.
>> Normally this is easily done by stripping the package name of
>> the version, but some ports define a proprietary LATEST_LINK
>> to avoid conflicts. This leads to the following problem, my
>> program has to do some guessing and in these cases it fails:
>>
>> # pkg_upgrade firefox3
>> #
>>
>> # pkg_upgrade firefox
>> www/firefox;firefox-2.0.0.20_4,1
>> www/firefox3;firefox-3.0.7,1
>> #
>>
>> It either matches none or more than one port. I could build
>> some guessing logic, but the real solution would be to have
>> the LATEST_LINK name in the index file. Is there any chance
>> a LATEST_LINK column will be added if I file a PR?
> 
> Upgrades are easy. Look up @comment ORIGIN line in +CONTENTS file of the
> port being upgraded, then look up this value in second column of INDEX
> file.
> 

I don't see how this is connected to my question.

I want people to be able to use LATEST_LINK to identify ports,
e.g. apache for www/apache13, apache20 form www/apache20 and so
forth. LATEST_LINK is a unique identifier, unfortunately
neither recorded in the INDEX nor +CONTENTS.
Also, to read it from +CONTENTS (if it were there) I'd have to
know, which package is actually meant, which I don't know,
because this is the information I want to find out.