Matthew Seaman wrote: > Steve Bertrand wrote: > >> Any guidance to fix the version numbering (especially to fix the FreeBSD >> package db) to make it automagic again, is very welcome: >> >> >> %svn diff -r56 EagleUser.pm >> Index: EagleUser.pm >> =================================================================== >> --- EagleUser.pm (revision 56) >> +++ EagleUser.pm (working copy) >> @@ -13,7 +13,7 @@ >> @EXPORT = qw( >> >> ); >> -$VERSION = sprintf "%d.%03d", q$Revision: 1.9 $ =~ /: (\d+)\.(\d+)/; > > ^^^^ This takes a version number like 1.9 (ie. a string of digits > containing > one decimal point) and converts it to 1.009 > >> +$VERSION = (q$Revision: 1.9 $ =~ /: (\d+)\.(\d+)/; > > ^^^^ whereas this just extracts the number from the revision string and > uses it as is -- ie. 1.9 > > I believe that svn will update $Revision$ keywords in source files (or it > has some similar function which only differs in the details), but I > could be > wrong, and it is entirely possible that the revision numbers will behave > differently -- svn keeping a repository wide version and cvs keeping a > version > per file. Consult the svn documentation on how to embed the version number > into the file -- once that is working, producing a perl one-liner to > initialise > $VERSION will be pretty easy. > > Assuming this is from a standard module using Module::Build or > ExtUtils::MakeMaker you should check the Makefile.PL at the top > level. In there if you're using Module::Build it should say something > like: > > version_from lib/EagleUser.pm > > (although the path may differ). This extracts the value of $VERSION > from the named .pm file and uses it as the overall module version. Assuming > your second line, you'll end up with a package name like > bsdpan-EagelUser-1.9 > (ExtUtils::MakeMaker works similarly). If you're desperate, you can > override the setting by patching the Makefile but that doesn't help at all > in your aim of having the version number update dynamically. > > The convention about padding version strings with leading zeros seems > to have come and gone in the perl world. I'm not at all sure what the > current recognised best practice is.
Thanks Matthew for such a detailed and informative response. I'll look into this today, and report back to the list for archive purposes if I get this to work. Cheers! Steve
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
