On Thu, May 04, 2006 at 09:03:42AM -0500, Emilio Perea wrote: > On Thu, May 04, 2006 at 01:49:00PM +0200, frantisek holop wrote: > > just in case port people haven't read this: > > http://www.softwareinreview.com/cms/content/view/35/1/
> > the important section: > > see what would happen, I substituted a 3.8 package directory for > > a 3.9 installation. The result was that many of the packages > > showed upgrades which were really downgrades to 3.8 packages. I > > suspect that is a bug -- package upgrade tools should only > > recognize higher versions as upgrades, and there should be some > > effort to verify that the source directory contains viable and > > up-to-date packages. > It is a nice review, but I don't see why it would be a bug for it to do > what you tell it to. People expect things to work one way, and are surprised when it doesn't work that way. I'll admit that the current wording of pkg_add(1) is confusing, since it talks about updating to newer versions, when all it does is figure out version numbers magically, and rely on the user to point pkg_add at a repository with newer versions...
