Re: hypothetical bin-NMU versioning question
On 2006-10-02 "Kevin B. McCarty" <kmccarty@Princeton.EDU> wrote:
> I have a hypothetical bin-NMU versioning question (this is asked only
> for my curiosity, so don't give it a high priority). Suppose that
> package X (version 1.0-1) is bin-NMU'ed on architectures A and B. At a
> later time it needs to be bin-NMU'ed on architectures B and C.
> Will the bin-NMUs be numbered incrementally independently on each arch,
> or grouped by round?
That seems to be what happens, yes.
See for example <http://packages.debian.org/gsasl> which was rebuilt after
http://lists.debian.org/debian-release/2006/07/msg00270.html
|---------------
| gsasl (amd64 and s390 +b1, all archs except s390 need a rebuild.)
|---------------
It was at
0.2.12-1+b1: amd64 s390
0.2.12-1: alpha arm hppa i386 ia64 kfreebsd-i386 m68k mips mipsel
powerpc sparc
previously and is now
0.2.12-1+b2: amd64
0.2.12-1+b1: alpha arm hppa i386 ia64 kfreebsd-i386 m68k mips mipsel
powerpc s390 sparc
> That is, will the arch:any binary packages of X on
> arch C get version 1.0-1+b1 or 1.0-1+b2? (I'm pretty sure that arch A
> will end up with 1.0-1+b1 and arch B with 1.0-1+b2, but correct me if
> that's wrong.) And does this numbering depend upon whether the reasons
> for the first and second rounds of bin-NMUs are the same or different?
Afaict the numbering is simply increased for each upload.
cu andreas
--
The 'Galactic Cleaning' policy undertaken by Emperor Zhark is a personal
vision of the emperor's, and its inclusion in this work does not constitute
tacit approval by the author or the publisher for any such projects,
howsoever undertaken. (c) Jasper Ffforde
Reply to: