mplayer revision try3
ehainry at free.fr
Fri Jun 29 05:17:29 PDT 2007
Citando Boey Maun Suang :
> Hi Emmanuel,
> > Yesterday, port -v outdated informed me that there was a "new"
> > version of MPlayer available:
> > Mplayer 1.0rc1_4 > 1.0rc1_try3 !
> The revision field in Portfiles is only supposed to be used for updates or
> fixes to the Portfile that don't involve upstream changes, and furthermore
> is only intended to contain positive integer values. In this case, the
> Portfile should have been altered from:
> version 1.0rc1
> revision 4
> version 1.0rc1try3
> (i.e. the revision number should have been removed; it should default to 0).
> Eric, would you be able to make this change? I don't think that it will
> muck up the revisioning, since the version comparison algorithm used in
> MacPorts will report 1.0rc1 < 1.0rc1try3. I suspect that Emmanuel had to
> force MacPorts to upgrade Mplayer in the first instance, as his output
> indicates that MacPorts thought on the basis of the strings that the
> installed version is newer than the "updated" version, so not many users
> will have installed the current version in the tree (including myself :P ).
Yes, I use -v when I do port outdated (this way I can check if some
updates to portfiles have been committed, and also remind me to put a
ticket if I have not yet). However I did not "force" upgrade but
installed manually as the variants have changed (+freetype and +fontconfig
have disappeared in favor of +osd).
> > But port outdated has a really strange output:
> > The following installed ports are outdated:
> > MPlayer 1.0rc1_ < 1.0rc1_try3
> Though I haven't checked the code, I suspect that problem is that the code
> that records values into the registry borked when told to store a
> non-numerical value into the revision field, and stored a null value
> instead; "port outdated" then checks the epoch (equal, both 0), version
> (equal, both 1.0rc1), and then revision (installed NULL < newest "try3", as
> NULL will evaluate to less that the character "t"). If you could create
> another ticket describing this and suggesting that the code check for the
> values being set in revision (in portindex.tcl and/or in the registry code),
> that would be great (I'm having trouble logging into Trac at present).
Ticket on trac:
http://trac.macports.org/projects/macports/ticket/12204 I don't know
which milestone I should have put (Needs developper review, MP1.4 or
MP1.5) so I put none.
> > PS: * the upgrade did not go perfectly, I had to change the Portfile to
> > revert the dependency on lzo instead of lzo2. I will put a ticket on
> > track.
> Not sure about this one. Eric, I suppose it's over to you!
It is almost resolved:
http://trac.macports.org/projects/macports/ticket/12196 . It is more or
less my bad for not deinstalling lzo after installing lzo2.
More information about the macports-users