"Confused" PORTREVISION

Kevin Oberman rkoberman at gmail.com
Mon Dec 25 06:09:59 UTC 2017


On Sun, Dec 24, 2017 at 9:27 PM, Adam Weinberger <adamw at adamw.org> wrote:

> On 24 Dec, 2017, at 22:23, Kevin Oberman <rkoberman at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> On Sun, Dec 24, 2017 at 9:18 PM, Adam Weinberger <adamw at adamw.org> wrote:
>> On 24 Dec, 2017, at 20:03, Walter Schwarzenfeld <
>> w.schwarzenfeld at utanet.at> wrote:
>>
>> But
>>
>> RUBY_RELVERSION=        2.3.6
>> RUBY_PORTREVISION=      0     <=
>> RUBY_PORTEPOCH=         1
>> RUBY_PATCHLEVEL=        0
>> RUBY23=                 ""      # PLIST_SUB helpers
>>
>> PORTREVISION=0 confuses pkg version
>>
>> pkg version |grep ruby23
>> ruby23-2.3.6,1                   <
>>
>> this is the version which is installed.
>>
>> PORTREVISION=0 is treated as if it were unset. Some people prefer using
>> that construct because it keeps line numbers consistent in the SVN history.
>>
>> # Adam
>>
>> The Porters Handbook now calls for the use of portrevision=0.
>>
>
> It does? I wasn't aware of that.
>
> # Adam
>

I learned about this when i submitted a port update to a new release and
the committer added PORTREVISION=0. He told me that it was now the approved
way if doing ports.

5.2.3.1

PORTREVISION is a monotonically increasing value which is reset to 0 with
every increase of DISTVERSION, typically every time there is a new official
vendor release. If PORTREVISION is non-zero, the value is appended to the
package name. Changes to PORTREVISION are used by automated tools like
pkg-version(8)
<https://www.FreeBSD.org/cgi/man.cgi?query=pkg-version&sektion=8&manpath=freebsd-release-ports>
to determine that a new package is available.
--
Kevin Oberman, Part time kid herder and retired Network Engineer
E-mail: rkoberman at gmail.com
PGP Fingerprint: D03FB98AFA78E3B78C1694B318AB39EF1B055683


More information about the freebsd-ports mailing list