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

Re: binNMUs: please exercise some care

On 2015-10-23 13:28, Thorsten Glaser wrote:
On Fri, 23 Oct 2015, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
It's also not quite that simple, even working things out by hand - see #599128
for example.

Hm, I’m still under the impression that the +bN suffix to the Debian
version of the package in the archive is the authoritative source for
what binNMU version a package currently has, as that’s taking porter
uploads into account which is a requirement. If the current code
doesn’t do that I consider it a bug which must be fixed (at the same
time, or before doing this change), which makes it more tricky, yes.

Specifically, wanna-build doesn't expose the binNMU version information for suites other than unstable / experimental (actually, it might be that it doesn't for suites that have an overlay - either way, it affects {,old}stable and testing), so the only way to be certain what binNMU number to use is to check manually. In practice what actually happens is that people forget about the bug, schedule the binNMUs and then grumble when either dak rejects the packages or something gets confused.



Reply to: