"Confused" PORTREVISION

[Kevin Oberman]

On Sun, Dec 24, 2017 at 10:18 PM, Adam Weinberger <adamw at adamw.org> wrote:

> On 24 Dec, 2017, at 23:09, Kevin Oberman <rkoberman at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> On Sun, Dec 24, 2017 at 9:27 PM, Adam Weinberger <adamw at adamw.org> wrote:
>> On 24 Dec, 2017, at 22:23, Kevin Oberman <rkoberman at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> On Sun, Dec 24, 2017 at 9:18 PM, Adam Weinberger <adamw at adamw.org> wrote:
>> On 24 Dec, 2017, at 20:03, Walter Schwarzenfeld <
>> w.schwarzenfeld at utanet.at> wrote:
>>
>> But
>>
>> RUBY_RELVERSION=        2.3.6
>> RUBY_PORTREVISION=      0     <=
>> RUBY_PORTEPOCH=         1
>> RUBY_PATCHLEVEL=        0
>> RUBY23=                 ""      # PLIST_SUB helpers
>>
>> PORTREVISION=0 confuses pkg version
>>
>> pkg version |grep ruby23
>> ruby23-2.3.6,1                   <
>>
>> this is the version which is installed.
>>
>> PORTREVISION=0 is treated as if it were unset. Some people prefer using
>> that construct because it keeps line numbers consistent in the SVN history.
>>
>> # Adam
>>
>> The Porters Handbook now calls for the use of portrevision=0.
>>
>> It does? I wasn't aware of that.
>>
>> # Adam
>>
>> I learned about this when i submitted a port update to a new release and
>> the committer added PORTREVISION=0. He told me that it was now the approved
>> way if doing ports.
>>
>> 5.2.3.1
>>
>> PORTREVISION is a monotonically increasing value which is reset to 0 with
>> every increase of DISTVERSION, typically every time there is a new official
>> vendor release. If PORTREVISION is non-zero, the value is appended to the
>> package name. Changes toPORTREVISION are used by automated tools like
>> pkg-version(8) to determine that a new package is available.
>>
>
> So that block isn't saying that 'PORTREVISION=0' is the official thing.
> It's saying that the value needs to be reset to 0. Removing the line
> entirely is still the preferred way of resetting it to zero.
>
> # Adam
>
>
> --
> Adam Weinberger
> adamw at adamw.org
> http://www.adamw.org
>

I don't see how it can be read that way. The It says that it is bumped
every time the port is modified (sort of, as there is specific detail on
whether it is bumped) and reset to 0 when the DISTVERSION changes. Nothing
says or implies that it should be removed to do the reset. I think it is
quite clear. I also am seeing this in many other ports including a couple I
have submitted.
--
Kevin Oberman, Part time kid herder and retired Network Engineer
E-mail: rkoberman at gmail.com
PGP Fingerprint: D03FB98AFA78E3B78C1694B318AB39EF1B055683