ports AUTOCONFxxx

N. Raghavendra raghu at mri.ernet.in
Tue Aug 26 11:45:44 UTC 2008

At 2008-08-26T16:37:28+08:00, joeb wrote:

> Why does the AUTOCONFxxx change the suffix between Freebsd releases?

>From `/usr/ports/UPDATING':

    AFFECTS: everyone
    AUTHOR: Mark Linimon <linimon at FreeBSD.org>
    The ports tree has been migrated to the latest version of autoconf,
    2.61.  Versions 2.53 and 2.59 were declared obsolete and removed.

> In 6.2 it was called AUTOCONF259 in 7.0 its called AUTOCONF261.  Is
> this not a violation of the naming convention?  The ports names are
> not suppose to carry the version number as part of its name.

I assume the convention you are referring to is from the Porter's
Handbook [5.2.5, Package Naming Conventions]:

  Otherwise, the PORTNAME should not contain any version-specific
  information. It is quite normal for several ports to have the same
  PORTNAME, as the www/apache* ports do; in that case, different
  versions (and different index entries) are distinguished by the

There is no violation of this convention in this case:

% make -C /usr/ports/devel/autoconf261 -V PORTNAME

In any case, the conventions are not followed strictly.  For instance,
the above section of the Porter's Handbook says, "The first letter of
the name part should be lowercase."  However,

% make -C /usr/ports/graphics/ImageMagick -V PKGNAME


N. Raghavendra <raghu at mri.ernet.in> | http://www.retrotexts.net/
Harish-Chandra Research Institute   | http://www.mri.ernet.in/
See message headers for contact and OpenPGP information.

More information about the freebsd-questions mailing list