[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Old Index]
Re: binutils update?
In article <Pine.GSO.4.64.0902201143190.21217%nova.fnal.gov@localhost> Tim
: On Fri, 20 Feb 2009, Alan Barrett wrote:
: > I can't find an official description of the binutils numbering scheme,
: > but I can find vague evidence that they have previously made the number
: > go backwards, using small numbers like .1, .2 for releases, and large
: > numbers like .50, .90, for snapshots prior to the release. In future,
: > I'd suggest inserting an extra ".0." in pkgsrc's version number for
: > snapshots of binutils; for example, if binutils has a future snapshot
: > that they call 2.20.50, then pkgsrc can call it 220.127.116.11; later, if
: > they have a release that they call 2.20.1, pkgsrc can also call it
: > 2.20.1.
: Sounds like a reasonable plan, if a snapshot is ever added to pkgsrc.
Please add a comment to the packages Makfile, so this version
numbering oddity and our solution to it are not forgotten.
Main Index |
Thread Index |