Re: Package version for 14.0-RELEASE

On Tue, Nov 14, 2023 at 10:08:59AM +0000, Doug Rabson wrote:
> On Mon, 13 Nov 2023 at 08:43, Doug Rabson <dfr@rabson.org> wrote:
> 
> >
> >
> > On Sat, 11 Nov 2023 at 16:26, Doug Rabson <dfr@rabson.org> wrote:
> >
> >>
> >>
> >> On Sat, 11 Nov 2023 at 09:52, Doug Rabson <dfr@rabson.org> wrote:
> >>
> >>> I think there is a problem with the pkgbase package versions for
> >>> 14.0-RELEASE. Looking at my overnight builds and comparing releng/14.0 with
> >>> releng/13.2, I see that the package versions for 14 don't include the minor
> >>> revision:
> >>>
> >>> # ls -l releng/13.2/repo/FreeBSD:13:amd64/latest/FreeBSD-runtime-13*
> >>> -rw-r--r--  1 root  wheel  3485868 Nov 10 22:39
> >>> releng/13.2/repo/FreeBSD:13:amd64/latest/FreeBSD-runtime-13.2p5.pkg
> >>> # ls -l releng/14.0/repo/FreeBSD:14:amd64/latest/FreeBSD-runtime-14*
> >>> -rw-r--r--  1 root  wheel  3342388 Nov 10 21:54
> >>> releng/14.0/repo/FreeBSD:14:amd64/latest/FreeBSD-runtime-14.pkg
> >>> r
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> I think the minor revision gets lost, possibly in the part of
> >>> release/Makefile that parses out the REVISION variable from newvers.sh.
> >>>
> >>> I'm not sure if this is a problem but it's certainly surprising.
> >>>
> >>
> >> Comparing 13.2 and 14.0, in 13.2, PKG_VERSION is defined as:
> >>
> >> PKG_VERSION:=   ${_REVISION}${EXTRA_REVISION:C/[[:space:]]//g}
> >>
> >>
> >> where _REVISION is "13.2".
> >>
> >> In 14.0, it is:
> >>
> >> PKG_VERSION:=   ${MAJOR_REVISION}${EXTRA_REVISION:C/[[:space:]]//g}
> >>
> >>
> >> where _REVISION is "14.0" and MAJOR_REVISION is ${_REVISION:R} which is
> >> "14".
> >>
> >> Perhaps it should change back?
> >>
> >
> > I opened https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=275051 to
> > track this problem.
> >
> 
> I think we should consider this for a FreeBSD 14.0 errata so that packages
> built for 14.0-RELEASE-p1 and later can have the correct version numbers.
> I've started drafting an errata notice and I will merge the fix to
> stable/14 before the end of this week.
> 
> Doug.

Yes I think this should deserves an errata, but actually there are for sure
other things that should come along with it, so maybe we should make a big
errata all at once in the next couple of month.

Best regards,
Bapt