Hello to all,
Recently, upstream change version naming from 1.0.2 -> 3025803779 based on
CI run id as release tag.
I'm with doubts using this version scheme since it's not human readable so
I'm thinking using something like g20220909 version related to a tag of
that day.
I've created an issue
> On Sep 12, 2022, at 04:17, Nuno Teixeira wrote:
>
> Hello to all,
>
> Recently, upstream change version naming from 1.0.2 -> 3025803779 based on CI
> run id as release tag.
Which port is this for? (Or is there literally a piece of software called
"upstream"? If so, that makes discussion
Hi!
> > Recently, upstream change version naming from 1.0.2 -> 3025803779 based on
> > CI run id as release tag.
>
> Which port is this for?
deskutils/treesheets
--
p...@freebsd.org +49 171 3101372 Now what ?
Hi,
I forgot to mention deskutils/treesheets port.
I've been talking with Stefan se@ and he advised me to avoid PORTEPOCH
swithing from 1.0.2 -> gYYMMDD and use 1.0.2 -> 1.0.${GH_TAGNAME} where:
GH_TAGNAME=3025803779 (release version).
This way we avoid PORTEPOCH and be prepared for future 1.1.x
(...)
And at this point I'm in doubt on what to use:
DISTVERSION= 1.0.${GH_TAGNAME} || DISTVERSION= {GH_TAGNAME}
:)
Nuno Teixeira escreveu no dia segunda, 12/09/2022
à(s) 19:19:
> Hi,
>
> I forgot to mention deskutils/treesheets port.
>
> I've been talking with Stefan se@ and he advised me to
Dear port maintainers,
The portscout new distfile checker has detected that one or more
unmaintained ports appears to be out of date. Please take the opportunity
to check each of the ports listed below, and if possible and appropriate,
submit/commit an update. Please consider also adopting this po
Hello all,
update:
1.0.2 -> {3025803779 || 1.0.3025803779 || g20220909,1 || 20220909 ||
1.0.20220909}
&& the winner is:
https://cgit.freebsd.org/ports/commit/?id=889217fc64fdcd29919819ffc1db2e700fa2bbe4
Thanks all!
Kurt Jaeger escreveu no dia segunda, 12/09/2022 à(s) 19:08:
> Hi!
>
> > > Rece
Nuno Teixeira wrote on
Date: Mon, 12 Sep 2022 18:37:05 UTC :
> (...)
> And at this point I'm in doubt on what to use:
>
> DISTVERSION= 1.0.${GH_TAGNAME} || DISTVERSION= {GH_TAGNAME}
>
> :)
As far as I can tell, neither works by itself, overall.
This is because ${GH_TAGNAME} will not in general
On 2022-Sep-12, at 14:15, Mark Millard wrote:
> Nuno Teixeira wrote on
> Date: Mon, 12 Sep 2022 18:37:05 UTC :
>
>> (...)
>> And at this point I'm in doubt on what to use:
>>
>> DISTVERSION= 1.0.${GH_TAGNAME} || DISTVERSION= {GH_TAGNAME}
>>
>> :)
>
> As far as I can tell, neither works by it
Hello.
When pkg lock/unlock with pkg-1.18.4, some packages may say "already" message.
# pkg lock pkg llvm13
pkg-1.18.4: lock this package? [y/N]: y
Locking pkg-1.18.4
llvm13-13.0.1_3: lock this package? [y/N]: y
Locking llvm13-13.0.1_3
llvm13-13.0.1_3: already locked
# pkg unlock pkg llvm13
pkg-1
10 matches
Mail list logo