Chris Rees wrote: > The PORTVERSION is invalid for this port; having alphabetical > characters is not allowed in the same part as digits; instead of > 3.4.0a3 you should have 3.4.0.a.3.
That is inconsistent with the Porter's Handbook, which notes '10.a3' as a valid PORTVERSION derived from a '10Alpha3' DISTVERSION. Cy Schubert wrote: > Unfortunately bsd.port.mk comes up with 3.4.0.a3. This is probably not > what we want. 3.4.0.a3 is the desired result. The logic in ports/Mk/bsd.port.mk dictates that when translating DISTVERSION -> PORTVERSION, adjacent [:alpha:] and [:digit:] are separated by '.' only when the former appears after the latter. Alexey Dokuchaev wrote: > the best way to deal with situations like this is to wait for next > release, and from that point use DISTVERSION as appropriate. +1 -- Sahil Tandon _______________________________________________ cvs-all@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/cvs-all To unsubscribe, send any mail to "cvs-all-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
