On 12.04.2012 10:34, Joshua Root wrote:
On 2012-4-13 00:20 , Jeremy Lavergne wrote:
When the epoch gets put back in, you'll also need to update the
revision.
epoch: 1
version: 4.2
revision: 2
The bug in the registry API that necessitates that is gone in 2.1
BTW.
Wasn't there a second issue that the filenames for packages don't
include epoch, so there is a risk of grabbing/reusing the package from a
different epoch if the version_revision part happens to match? Is this
fixed as well in 2.1? None of the packages on packages.macports.org
have epochs in the filenames yet.
Thanks,
Eric
_______________________________________________
macports-dev mailing list
macports-dev@lists.macosforge.org
http://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/macports-dev
