On Jan 21, 2022, at 23:32, Gabriel Rosenkoetter wrote: > > I think the [+] label, in the output of `port info <whatever>` is a confusing > UI/UX choice, especially in the context of the + as an argument to `port > install <port> +<port>_version` to request activation of a specific Port > version. > > I think displaying the default/anticipated version makes a lot of sense, I'm > just saying the way that's expressed (and that the currently "active" version > isn't expressed at all in *that* output) is confusing. > > That is: I think using + both to say "install this version" and "regardless > of what's active, our default would've been this" is a confusing conflation > of symbols. > > Maybe `port info …` should use another symbol (*?) there, and should display > the active version by bracketing the version name?
The use of the "+" character is intentional. "+" means a variant is enabled. "-" means a variant is disabled. "[ ]" around either "+" or "-" means the choice comes from the port's default_variants directives. "( )" around either "+" or "-" means the choice comes from your variants.conf file. No symbol around "+" or "-" means the choice comes from what you specified on the command line. This is explained in the port-variants manpage. > I'm confused about why that'd read "perl5 @5.28.3 (lang)" rather than "perl5 > @5.34.0 (lang)" on the system in question. The version field of the perl5 port is 5.28.3, regardless what variant is chosen. It is not permitted for a port to change its version (or revision or epoch) in a variant; the portindex does not accommodate that. The version field of the perl5 port is pretty irrelevant since the port does nothing other than depend on other ports that install the real files. The version of the perl5 port could just as easily have been "1.0" or "0" or "42".
