Solved A lower PORTREVISION than PORTEPOCH confuses pkg version

[talsamon]

PORTREVISION=0 confuses pkg version respective a lower PORTREVISION than PORTEPOCH.

lang/ruby:

/usr/ports/Mk/bsd.ruby.mk
RUBY_RELVERSION=        2.3.6
RUBY_PORTREVISION=      0   <==
RUBY_PORTEPOCH=         1
RUBY_PATCHLEVEL=        0
RUBY23=                 ""      # PLIST_SUB helpers

pkg version |grep ruby23
ruby23-2.3.6,1                   <

but this is the version which is installed.

 

[talsamon]

I don't know which sense PORTEPOCH makes. Does we need this? Is not PORTREVISION enough?

 

[talsamon]

Maybe, it was my error. I saw the default version of ruby is now 2.4. (No entry in /usr/ports/UPDATING). After upgrade no problems.

Edit: Before upgrade I saw databases/ruby-bdb does not install. So I guess the problem was a mix of 2.3 and 2.4 ports and not what I guessed before.
Solved.

 

[SirDice]

I don't know which sense PORTEPOCH makes. Does we need this? Is not PORTREVISION enough?

PORTEPOCH is used in case the version number would appear to go back, like 20161212 -> 1.0.

Dropping or resetting PORTEPOCH incorrectly leads to no end of grief.

Porter's Handbook: 5.2.3. PORTREVISION and PORTEPOCH

 

[talsamon]

Yes, I readed the part of the Handbook after the post. My problem was/is the same as YuryG 's in Thread 63849.