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 Yesterday, port -v outdated informed me that there was a "new" 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 > > to: > > 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Yes, I use -v when I do port outdated (this way I can check if some updates to portfiles have been committed, and also remind me to put a ticket if I have not yet).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 But port outdated has a really strange output: 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 The following installed ports are outdated: 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 instead; "port outdated" then checks the epoch (equal, both 0), version 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. Emmanuel _______________________________________________ macports-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo/macports-users
