From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from out1.smtp.messagingengine.com (out1.smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.25])
	by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.4/8.13.4) with ESMTP id j3RHr4tS015417
	for <gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>; Wed, 27 Apr 2005 17:53:04 GMT
Received: from web2.messagingengine.com (web2.internal [10.202.2.211])
	by frontend1.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5526CC7E915
	for <gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>; Wed, 27 Apr 2005 13:53:11 -0400 (EDT)
Received: by web2.messagingengine.com (Postfix, from userid 99)
	id B0E03801; Wed, 27 Apr 2005 13:53:04 -0400 (EDT)
Message-Id: <1114624384.32128.232858999@webmail.messagingengine.com>
X-Sasl-Enc: 0HgcMophso1inE1Y752FgbAtsNT8e84ytlwDTkUehSZA 1114624384
From: "marduk" <marduk@gentoo.org>
To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-15"
Precedence: bulk
List-Post: <mailto:gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gentoo-dev+help@gentoo.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:gentoo-dev+unsubscribe@gentoo.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gentoo-dev+subscribe@gentoo.org>
List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail <gentoo-dev.gentoo.org>
X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org
Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: MIME::Lite 1.5  (F2.73; T1.001; A1.64; B3.05; Q3.03)
References: <20050427130938.GG20252@ulric.rafique.org>
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] why do different ebuilds have the same version number?
In-Reply-To: <20050427130938.GG20252@ulric.rafique.org>
Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2005 10:53:04 -0700
X-Archives-Salt: dd1d3e93-eb20-48a2-934f-ff8277a7aa5c
X-Archives-Hash: b76d4be417a79f6a3d046492ffd268b2


On Wed, 27 Apr 2005 06:09:38 -0700, "Imran Sher Rafique"
<imran@rafique.org> said:
> I hope this doesn't come across as too much of a rant.
> 
> Summary
> -------
> Is it accepted practice to allow for changes in an ebuild without
> changing the
> ebuild version number?

Unfortunately yes ;-).  This also has been a problem for
packages.gentoo.org code, because I basically have to make a series of
assumptions as to when an ebuild is considered "new" or "updated". 
Originally I thought I could just just look at the timestamps on the
ebuilds, but that turned out to be a very bad determiniation of when an
ebuild has changed.  Then I thought revision numbers, but that's
innacurate too.  Basically now it comes down to looking at the current
ebuild in portage and comparing it to the last time I looked at it. 
It's much more expensive, because you have to look at *every* ebuild,
not just "ebuilds changed since x date/time" or "ebuilds newer than
version y".  Oh no, now I sound like I'm ranting ;-)

-m
-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list