Ryan Hill wrote:
> On Fri, 13 Jun 2008 13:35:52 +0200
> Marius Mauch <genone@g.o> wrote:
> 
>> Ignoring possible semantic issues for the moment, I'd be against this
>> simply because it would require the PM to be aware of the current
>> revision of the repository and to transform it into a integer value
>> (trivial for SVN, not so trivial for CVS for example). Which in turn
>> either means that the PM has to internally support the SCMs or support
>> some new phase functions to extract the revision.
> 
> I'm confused.  If I have a gcc-4.4.0.live ebuild which checks out rev.
> 136737, after the merge do I have gcc-4.4.0_pre136737
> or gcc-4.4.0_pre1 (and gcc-4.4.0_pre2 next time I merge it, etc)
> installed?

it would be gcc-4.4.0_pre1 but you'll have the revision inside the 
ebuild as var so you can get it easily. (e.g. the description shows it)

> The former, as Marius said, requires knowledge of how to get a sane
> revision id from every SCM we want to support to be built into
> the package manager.

> 
> I wonder if instead of rev id, we could use a timestamp to fill in
> _pre.  It's not ideal but it narrows the checkout down somewhat.
> Also, we could use pkg_info to report revision numbers (for those SCM's
> that have such a thing).  The combination of the two might be enough -
> you'd have the revision you installed, when you installed it, and an
> automatic incrementor for those ppl who like those kinds of things.

I like better single digits but it's more or less the same as structure 
and code.

> If a dev wants to force a reinstall because of ebuild or patch changes
> or whatever, they should still be able to use -rX as usual.
> 
>> A lot of projects work like this:
>>
>> * trunk/ is current development, and is ahead of any release.
>>
>> * branches/0.26/ is forked from trunk/ when 0.26 is released, and is
>> equal to or ahead of any 0.26 release.
>>
>> How does your proposal handle this?
> 
> I'm guessing the dev would need to change 0.26.live to 0.26.1.live when
> 0.26 was released.  I already need to do this with my live ebuilds.  Of
> course, with some projects you never know if the next version will be
> 0.26.1, 0.27, or 0.3, or 1.0...

That's an upstream issue, all we should care is about getting a version 
value that makes sense for us, better if it does for them.

> As for an ebuild tracking trunk, I guess we're back to -9999.live. ;P

or just keep in mind that even trunk changes enough that you need to 
update the ebuild thus makes sense use a next supposed version.

lu

-- 

Luca Barbato
Gentoo Council Member
Gentoo/linux Gentoo/PPC
http://dev.gentoo.org/~lu_zero

-- 
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list