470642 – media-libs/exiftool-9.29.0 version bump?

Bug 470642 - media-libs/exiftool-9.29.0 version bump?

Summary: media-libs/exiftool-9.29.0 version bump?

Status:	RESOLVED FIXED

Alias:	None

Product:	Gentoo Linux
Classification:	Unclassified
Component:	[OLD] Library (show other bugs)
Hardware:	All Linux

Importance:	Normal normal (vote)
Assignee:	Gentoo Graphics Project

URL:
Whiteboard:
Keywords:

Depends on:
Blocks:

Reported:	2013-05-19 13:21 UTC by DrSlony
Modified:	2014-02-15 03:00 UTC (History)
CC List:	3 users (show)

See Also:
Package list:
Runtime testing required:	---

Attachments
Add an attachment (proposed patch, testcase, etc.)

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.

Description DrSlony 2013-05-19 13:21:31 UTC

I ran into a problem with writing DNG 1.4 tags, which was reported fixed on exiftool's website, so I checked versions.

I'm using media-libs/exiftool-9.120.0
The latest version on the website, released yesterday, is 9.29. This is good news, but I appear to be using a version from the future, and there has been a regression.

Solution: either fix the regression in the future and port it back to 2013, or sync the ebuild versions.

Comment 1 DrSlony 2013-05-19 13:58:14 UTC

Off-topic, ID verification for bugzilla@gentoo.org, others please ignore this comment.

Comment 2 Jeroen Roovers (RETIRED) gentoo-dev

2013-05-19 17:09:53 UTC

(In reply to comment #1)
> Off-topic, ID verification for bugzilla@gentoo.org, others please ignore
> this comment.

What are you on about? Is this a real bug report?

Comment 3 DrSlony 2013-05-19 19:12:04 UTC

Yes Jeroen, real, with a bit of humor ;]
Comment 1 was for an off-topic issue I took up with bgo admins, now kindly resolved.

This is not just a version bump, but also a request that the versions used in portage correspond to the real versions used by exiftool. I can't figure out why they don't; I changed the ebuild to /usr/local/portage/media-libs/exiftool/exiftool-9.29.ebuild and it updated to the latest version just fine (of course warning me that 120 -> 29 is a downgrade, which it's not), so why create confusion with these non-matching high version numbers in the first place?

Comment 4 Tim Harder gentoo-dev

2014-02-15 03:00:31 UTC

(In reply to DrSlony from comment #3)
> This is not just a version bump, but also a request that the versions used
> in portage correspond to the real versions used by exiftool. I can't figure
> out why they don't; I changed the ebuild to
> /usr/local/portage/media-libs/exiftool/exiftool-9.29.ebuild and it updated
> to the latest version just fine (of course warning me that 120 -> 29 is a
> downgrade, which it's not), so why create confusion with these non-matching
> high version numbers in the first place?

Read the version related info near the bottom of [1]. At some point I might revert the numbering for exiftool though since upstream seems to follow regular versioning procedures.

Anyway, 9.50 is now in the tree so this should be fixed.

[1]: https://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/perl/perl-herd.xml