svn commit: r479009 - head/net/ss5

Nathan Owens ndowens at yahoo.com
Wed Sep 5 04:47:31 UTC 2018


FATAL: Makefile: PORTVERSION must not contain "-". You should modify "3.8.9-8".Error above is why i had the distversionsuffix

Modified the pkg-plist
   On Tuesday, September 4, 2018, 11:41:38 PM CDT, Tobias Kortkamp <tobik at FreeBSD.org> wrote:  
 
 On Wed, Sep 5, 2018, at 06:23, Steve Wills wrote:
> Author: swills
> Date: Wed Sep  5 04:23:09 2018
> New Revision: 479009
> URL: https://svnweb.freebsd.org/changeset/ports/479009
> 
> Log:
>  net/ss5: Update to 3.8.9
>  
>  PR:        230556
>  Submitted by:    Nathan <ndowens at yahoo.com>
>  Approved by:    maintainer timeout (raffaele.delorenzo at libero.it, >3 weeks)
> 
> Modified:
>  head/net/ss5/Makefile  (contents, props changed)
>  head/net/ss5/distinfo  (contents, props changed)
>  head/net/ss5/pkg-plist  (contents, props changed)
> 
> Modified: head/net/ss5/Makefile
> ==============================================================================
> --- head/net/ss5/Makefile    Wed Sep  5 03:45:53 2018    (r479008)
> +++ head/net/ss5/Makefile    Wed Sep  5 04:23:09 2018    (r479009)
> @@ -2,17 +2,20 @@
>  # $FreeBSD$
>  
>  PORTNAME=    ss5
> -PORTVERSION=    3.8.5
> -DISTVERSIONSUFFIX=    -1
> -PORTREVISION=    3
> +PORTVERSION=    3.8.9
> +DISTVERSIONSUFFIX=    -8

The suffix appears to actually be part of the version.  There is a
3.8.9-7, 3.8.9-6, etc. too if you look at:

https://sourceforge.net/projects/ss5/files/ss5/

> Modified: head/net/ss5/pkg-plist
> ==============================================================================
> --- head/net/ss5/pkg-plist    Wed Sep  5 03:45:53 2018    (r479008)
> +++ head/net/ss5/pkg-plist    Wed Sep  5 04:23:09 2018    (r479009)
> @@ -1,6 +1,9 @@
> - at sample etc/ss5/ss5.ha.sample
> - at sample etc/ss5/ss5.conf.sample
> - at sample etc/ss5/ss5.passwd.sample
> +%%ETCDIR%%/ss5.conf
> +%%ETCDIR%%/ss5.conf.sample
> +%%ETCDIR%%/ss5.ha
> +%%ETCDIR%%/ss5.ha.sample
> +%%ETCDIR%%/ss5.passwd
> +%%ETCDIR%%/ss5.passwd.sample

This looks wrong and will overwrite existing configuration files
when upgrading the port.  Why not keep using @sample?
  


More information about the svn-ports-head mailing list