[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Fwd: wheezy-backports: lxc security update: looking for sponsor + BSA requested

On Thu, Jul 30, 2015 at 02:06:32PM +0200, Christian Seiler wrote:
> > I would expect the changelog to retain all previous entries that went in
> > the backports for a given suite and _add_ the ones since them.
> Ok, maybe I'm just confused about how the changelog thing works for
> backports. I though one would need to take the new package from jessie
> (in case of wheezy-backports) and just do the same changes that were
> done beforehand (which I did) and then add a single entry?

That is for the very first upload do backports.

> I always thought of debian/changelog as a linear history. You are now
> telling me that is wrong, I presume.

No, that is correct; what is wrong, in my opinion, is your perception of
what a linear history is.

> So if I understand you correctly, I would have the following order in
> debian/changelog?
>  - 1.0.6-6+deb8u1~bpo70+1
>       - reads "Rebuild for wheezy-backports.", ia64 fix is
>         not mentioned again
>  - 1.0.6-6+deb8u1
>       - security update changelog entry by Salvatore Bonaccorso
>  - 1.0.6-6~bpo70+2
>       - "Fix FTBFS on ia64."
>  - 1.0.6-6~bpo70+1
>       - "Rebuild for wheezy-backports."
>  - 1.0.6-6
>       - the changelog entry that was part of Jessie
>  - ... all the rest
> Is that correct?

Yes; the changelog has to document the history of the package in the
suite it is being uploaded to, so the sequence above is what in fact
happened to lxc in wheezy-backports.

Antonio Terceiro <terceiro@debian.org>

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: