We should probably pad the version number, and shorten things up.. similar to: package-1.2-fbsd09.1-x86.pkg package-1.2-fbsd09.1-x64.pkg package-1.2-fbsd09.1-ppc.pkg package-1.2-fbsd09.1-ppc64.pkg package-1.2-fbsd09.1-arm.pkg For app "Package" version 1.2, on FreeBSD 9.1 drop the .1 for .0 versions. The reason for the padding is to help with sorting, at least until freebsd 100.0 comes out. :P Chuck Burns On 3/20/2012 5:40 AM, Alexander Yerenkow wrote: > IMHO, > 32 / 64 = easily parsable and represent integer. > > i386/amd64 - wellknown names, but this info about processor bits not lies > in math. > My point is i386 is arch, so can be kept, while 32 is processor bit count. > If you'll keep 32/64 various checks in side software will be simple (if you > have 32 bit processor, then this info is bundled in "32"), > while if you consider using "i386" string as storage of information about > "32" bit, it not so elegant. > Also, linuxes has come to i386- i586- i686- mess, and many their scripts > looks overbloated when they checks if system really 32 bit. > > Just my point of view :) > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-current_at_freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscribe_at_freebsd.org"Received on Tue Mar 20 2012 - 11:20:43 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wed May 19 2021 - 11:40:25 UTC