-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 6.3k
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
[libpq] Version missmatch between CONTROL and portfile #9235
Comments
I would also like to have something like that. But it would require and extra tag like vcpkg_version or similar in the CONTROL file to remove the extra |
Maybe an alternative is something to add the -8 for the Something like the following in the
And then in the portfile use the |
Perhaps another option can be a vcpkg function that formats a version as required
And it should understand some normal notations with some flexibility. PS: I don't know cmake thus can't give a cmake equivalent function signature PS2: I see also a missmatch in libpqxx between CONTROL and the CMakeList.txt
|
Maybe at the very least a way to unit test in a pipeline. Not sure how vcpkg pipelines are set up or how configurable they are, but before a PR gets build by the CI to just check the versions. Perhaps something in the ports folder or a pre-commit hook that checks it, at commit or CI build time. Anything that relies on discipline to keep in sync will fail unless checked/enforced by an automated process. |
This is valid for many things beyond the versioning. |
Hi @CJCombrink thanks for posting this issue. |
Is your feature request related to a problem? Please describe.
It is not techincally a problem, but can probably be.
There is a missmatch between the "Version" set in the CONTROL file and the portfile.cmake for libpq.
The CONTROL file states 9.6.1 but 9.6.3 is downloaded
Proposed solution
There should be a way to set the version once in the CONTROL file and then use that from the portfile. Something like
${VCPKG_VERSION_FROM_CONTROL}
Describe alternatives you've considered
No other alternatives are considered. The solution should have minimal maintenance and the proposed solution should be good enough.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: