On Wed, 14 Jun 2006, Jeremy C. Reed wrote:

> FreeBSD's portversion does:
>
> =
> <  for older
> >  installed version is newer (such as testing or out-of-date pkgsrc)
> ?  unknown
>
> A man page is here
> http://www.gsp.com/cgi-bin/man.cgi?section=1&topic=portversion
>
> FreeBSD's pkg_version is similar:
> http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/man.cgi?query=pkg_version&apropos=0&sektion=0&manpath=FreeBSD%206.0-stable&format=html
>
> Examples:
>
> % pkg_version
> Hermes                              <
> a2ps-letter                         <
>
> % pkg_version -v
> Hermes-1.3.2                        <   needs updating (port has 1.3.3_2)
> a2ps-letter-4.13_1                  <   needs updating (port has 4.13b_3)
>
> And "-l" can be used to only list matching status flags.
>
>
> I could upgrade the following is:
>  pkg_version -l '<'
>
> So my suggestion is to use a "<".
>
> devel/readline - readline-5.0 < readline-5.1pl1nb1
>
> (Including category is good too.)

 	Right now pkg_chk does not have the logic to determine if a package
 	version is larger, just different, so it would _always_ use '<' in
 	a case of mismatch.

 	So, we have messages of the form: (the last one is only with -B)

devel/readline - readline-5.0 < readline-5.1pl1nb1
devel/readline - readline-5.0 < readline-5.1pl1nb1 (binary package available)
devel/readline - readline-5.1pl1nb1 missing
devel/readline - readline-5.1pl1nb1 build_version mismatch

 	I'm undecided as to whether the missing should be

devel/readline - missing readline-5.1pl1nb1

 	instead, or maybe put the MISSING in caps, as in the other cases the
 	first version shown is the installed version.

 	Final call to the peanut gallery :)

-- 
 		David/absolute       -- www.NetBSD.org: No hype required --