Re: NetBSD-9.1

>It does hurt; it's an incorrect warning about something that isn't a bad
>thing to do, and it causes people to think they shoudl do something else
>an search for what to do.

That's exactly what I ment.
Personally, I know that's no issue and everything works but, a new user
might just go somewhere else when confronted by these.

>Actually I think our amd64 packages are built on 9_STABLE and labeled
>9.0 so the kernel has a threading fix necessary for
>rust to run properly; see lang/rust for pointers if interesteed.

Don't know what others do but, the packages I merge are for sure built on
9.0_STABLE. Or, rather were, now they are built on 9.1_STABLE.

>Someone will need to make a patch for pkg_add and friends.
Hmm... don't know if I dare but, if I find sometime I might look at it.

Thanks for the hints.

Den mån 26 okt. 2020 kl 18:59 skrev Greg Troxel <gdt%lexort.com@localhost>:

Pedro Pinho <pmppinho%gmail.com@localhost> writes:

> Yes, I know but, they shouldn't be there.

Someone will need to make a patch for pkg_add and friends.

Basically there is more or less consensus that on NetBSD this should
only match on major version. Other OSes may have different rules.

I don't think there is any objection or other barrier other than
ENOPATCH.