Re: updating CHANGES-YYYY manually considered harmful ;-)

To: Aleksey Cheusov <cheusov%tut.by@localhost>
Subject: Re: updating CHANGES-YYYY manually considered harmful ;-)
From: David Holland <dholland-pkgtech%netbsd.org@localhost>
Date: 2008年6月23日 03:54:36 +0000

On Tue, Jun 17, 2008 at 11:23:23PM +0300, Aleksey Cheusov wrote:
 > Ok. Then where is the information about downgrades?
 > 
 > $ grep devel/guile-gtk CHANGES-*
 > CHANGES-2006: Updated devel/guile-gtk to 0.40.91nb2 [wiz 2006年02月22日]
 > CHANGES-2006: Updated devel/guile-gtk to 0.5 [gdt 2006年08月22日]
 > $
 > 
 > 20060520 vs. 20070520
 > devel/guile-gtk guile-gtk 0.40.91nb3 0.5
 > [...]
What's missing there?
I suppose the Dewey logic is upset that 0.5 > 0.40? Unfortunately,
many packages are versioned that way.
 > net/sdig sdig 0.30nb1 0.30
That looks like a slipup. I just restored nb1.
-- 
David A. Holland
dholland%netbsd.org@localhost

Follow-Ups:
- Re: updating CHANGES-YYYY manually considered harmful ;-)
  - From: Alan Barrett

References:
- Manual updating CHANGES-YYYY considered harmful ;-)
  - From: Aleksey Cheusov
- Re: updating CHANGES-YYYY manually considered harmful ;-)
  - From: Aleksey Cheusov
- Re: updating CHANGES-YYYY manually considered harmful ;-)
  - From: Tonnerre Lombard
- Re: updating CHANGES-YYYY manually considered harmful ;-)
  - From: Aleksey Cheusov

Prev by Date: Re: bsd.prefs.mk include order
Next by Date: Re: updating CHANGES-YYYY manually considered harmful ;-)
Previous by Thread: Re: updating CHANGES-YYYY manually considered harmful ;-)
Next by Thread: Re: updating CHANGES-YYYY manually considered harmful ;-)
Indexes:

Home | Main Index | Thread Index | Old Index