docs/66775: Clarification that port names should not contain version numbers

[Oliver Eikemeier]

The following reply was made to PR docs/66775; it has been noted by GNATS.

From: Oliver Eikemeier <eikemeier at fillmore-labs.com>
To: Aasmund Eikli <inter at o12a.com>
Cc: freebsd-gnats-submit at FreeBSD.org
Subject: Re: docs/66775: Clarification that port names should not contain version numbers
Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2004 16:02:21 +0200

 Aasmund Eikli wrote:
 
 > From: Aasmund Eikli <inter at o12a.com>
 > To: Peter Pentchev <roam at ringlet.net>
 > Cc: bug-followup at freebsd.org
 > Subject: Re: docs/66775: Clarification that port names should not 
 > contain
 >  version numbers
 > Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2004 11:13:00 +0200
 >
 >  Looks good!
 >
 >  A very minor point though, shouldnt "not duplicate ports" be "no
 >  duplicate ports"?
 > [...]
 >  Peter Pentchev wrote:
 >>
 >> Index: doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/articles/committers-guide/article.sgml
 >> ===================================================================
 >> RCS file: /home/ncvs/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/articles/committers-
 >> guide/article.sgml,v
 >> retrieving revision 1.207
 >> diff -u -r1.207 article.sgml
 >> --- doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/articles/committers-guide/article.sgml	8 Aug 2004 
 >> 13:43:53 -0000	1.207
 >> +++ doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/articles/committers-guide/article.sgml	9 Aug 2004 
 >> 12:21:10 -0000
 >> @@ -2431,9 +2431,10 @@
 >>
 >>  		<procedure>
 >>  		  <step>
 >> -		    <para>Upgrade the copied port to the new version (remember
 >> -		      to change the <makevar>PORTNAME</makevar> so there
 >> -		      are not duplicate ports with the same name).</para>
 >> +		    <para>Upgrade the copied port to the new version.  Remember
 >> +		      to change either the <makevar>PORTNAME</makevar> or
 >> +		      the <makevar>LATEST_LINK</makevar> variable so there
 >> +		      are not duplicate ports with the same name.</para>
 >>  		  </step>
 
 As said before, I would prefer suggesting to change LATEST_LINK only, 
 and PORTNAME only in rare cases. The reader might get the impression 
 that `apache-1.3' and `apache-2.0' have the same name, although they 
 don't.
 
 >> Index: doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/porters-handbook/book.sgml
 >> ===================================================================
 >> RCS file: /home/dcvs/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/porters-
 >> handbook/book.sgml,v
 >> retrieving revision 1.476
 >> diff -u -r1.476 book.sgml
 >> --- doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/porters-handbook/book.sgml	9 Aug 2004 11:51:
 >> 37 -0000	1.476
 >> +++ doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/porters-handbook/book.sgml	9 Aug 2004 12:29:
 >> 31 -0000
 >> @@ -1071,7 +1071,11 @@
 >>  	    <literal>Data::Dumper</literal> module becomes
 >>  	    <literal>p5-Data-Dumper</literal>.  If the software in question
 >>  	    has numbers, hyphens, or underscores in its name, you may 
 >> include
 >> -	    them as well (like <literal>kinput2</literal>).</para>
 >> +	    them as well (like <literal>kinput2</literal>).  Make sure that
 >> +	    the <makevar>PORTNAME</makevar> and
 >> +	    <makevar>PORTVERSION</makevar> variables contain the name and
 >> +	    the version of the port respectively.  You should not mix the
 >> +	    two.</para>
 >>  	</listitem>
 
 Same here. Perhaps `The version number should not be part of PORTNAME 
 (like apache-2.0), except when the original distribution explicitly name 
 it that way (like libxml2-2.6).'
 
 -Oliver