Hello, I read that having the version as 9999 follows the "package manager specification" and is also consistent across other packages. Thanks Joe Reproducible: Always
The current version scheme is valid according to package manager specifications, as discussed on irc. The extra digits may not be necessary in this case (at least right now, i didn't check the package's version history), but there's no requirement that a live ebuild only have four 9's when not explicitly required otherwise.
Hello Ian, I had the below discussion on #gentoo. 00:15 < joe9> how can I tell emerge to install the 9999 version: http://codepad.org/Z6T8HxX I have this in my package.accept_keywords: http://codepad.org/wQb7PHfo 00:15 < joe9> wrong paste the last link. 00:15 < joe9> http://codepad.org/MUDsYdi4 00:15 < hydrogen> you probably need to add it to package.unmask 00:16 < hydrogen> -9999 tend to be hard masked 00:16 < joe9> hydrogen, ok. thanks. 00:17 < joe9> this is in my package.unmask. still http://codepad.org/UkATyQo9 00:18 < hydrogen> what if you try emerge -a =sci-electronics/pcb-9999 ? 00:18 < hydrogen> hmm 00:19 < hydrogen> you know, I bet version 20110918 is > 9999 00:19 < hydrogen> based on math and all 00:19 < hydrogen> :) 00:19 < joe9> http://codepad.org/3G2SHYU5 that works. 00:23 < hydrogen> yeah, it's the version thing 00:24 < hydrogen> you would need to mask >9999 in package.mask to prevent it from "upgrading" 00:24 < hydrogen> or rename it to 99999999 :) 00:32 < nawks> there is no pcb-9999 00:33 < nawks> weird 00:34 < joe9> nawks: it is my version. I am building it. 00:34 < nawks> aha 00:34 < joe9> hydrogen: thanks, I rebuilt it to 99999999 00:34 < joe9> s/rebuilt/renamed/ 00:36 < nawks> joe9: that is the problem with that kind of version number. i think most have learned to better numbering. f.e. pcb-1_beta-20110918 00:36 < nawks> and then pcb-9999 will be > 00:37 < hydrogen> I think thats against pms though 00:38 < nawks> pms? there are no girls on the internet 00:38 < hydrogen> oh no 00:38 < nawks> numbers like sci-electronics/pcb-20110918 i think are deprecated 00:38 < hydrogen> I lied, you can have a number after the _beta bit 00:39 < nawks> i see that kind of numbering disappearing 00:39 < hydrogen> makes sense now that i'm thinking about it 00:39 < hydrogen> otherwise having two betas would kind of suck :) 00:39 < hydrogen> pcb-1_pre20110918 probably the most likely 00:39 < joe9> nawks, I will raise this as a bug with the pcb folks. 00:40 < hydrogen> well, I suspect that the fact that it's a snapshot from 2011 means they probably won't change much now 00:40 < hydrogen> but for the next snapshot, 00:40 < hydrogen> you never know! 00:41 < nawks> you have to check if that old version is because project is dead or because gentoo maintainer is dead 00:44 < joe9> nawks, hydrogen, I can submit the patch, if that helps. Which made me open this bug. Thanks Joe
