jmr at macports.org
Fri Jun 10 01:15:12 PDT 2011
On 2011-6-10 16:43 , Andrea D'Amore wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 10, 2011 at 2:44 AM, Ryan Schmidt <ryandesign at macports.org> wrote:
>> The epoch is the most significant number for MacPorts when determining if a port is outdated. When MacPorts says that "miniupnpc 1.5_0" is installed, it really means "2_1.5_0" because the epoch is 2. In r79340 you changed it to "0_1.5_1" by removing the epoch line and adding the revision.
>> MacPorts sees "0_1.5_1" as less than "2_1.5_0" so it will not present your update to the user in "port outdated".
> That's actually false, I tested before committing and just ran the
> test again to confirm: decreasing epoch, increasing revision and
> running portindex shows a port as outdated.
1.5_1 compares as newer than 1.5_0, sure. But does it also compare newer
than every previous version this port has had? Given that it was
necessary to set a non-zero epoch at some point, this is far from
You can't assume that everyone will be upgrading from the immediately
> Actually the epoch didn't make any sense because current target is 1.5
> tarball and mastersite offers both 1.5.tar.gz abd a newer
> 1.5.20110527.tar.gz, if epoch had to be set at all it had to be
Epoch is just an integer that has to be increased when a newer version
looks older to rpm-vercomp than an older one. Upstream's versioning
scheme doesn't determine the epoch.
More information about the macports-dev