Tor and unusual version numbers

Salvatore Domenick Desiano sal at
Fri Apr 27 04:40:57 PDT 2007

o > and for the immediate workaround, the port maintainer can bump the epoch.
o Isn't that going to muck things up for future versions if I then delete it
o completely?  I figure that that must be the reason why I get
o netpbm                         10.26.30_0 > 10.26.39_0  !

My understanding is that the epoch "outranks" the revision. So, until 
tor's version numbers start working with rpm-vercomp, we leave the epoch 
flag in. For packages that are always a problem, the epoch flag never 
leaves. It is, I guess, a "permanent" addition, since it is hard to go 
back until we can guarantee that everyone has gotten rid of their 
epoch-marked version.

Though that raises a question: could epoch be interpreted as "if the 
current Portfile does not contain an epoch, ignore the epoch on the 
installed version"? Is that semantically correct?

o A question now to everyone using tor or tor-devel: what does "port -v
o outdated" yield for you?  My testing, like that of Chris Pickel, suggests that
o rpm-vercomp is working fine; I don't quite understand the Tcl to understand
o exactly what port.tcl is doing.

Yes, again, outdated does not pick up tor.

-- Sal

  Salvatore Domenick Desiano
    Doctoral Candidate
      Robotics Institute
        Carnegie Mellon University

More information about the macports-dev mailing list