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

Re: Binary only Recompilations

On Sat, Dec 11, 1999 at 02:43:22PM +0100, Wichert Akkerman wrote:
> Previously Anthony Towns wrote:
> > Background: every now and then, libraries get updated or bugs in gcc get
> > fixed, and packages get reuploaded without any source changes, and with
> > their debian revision bumped by 0.0.1. At the moment, there's no obvious
> > way of automatically associating these things with their source.
> What I plan to do for woody is add a new Build-Version field. So
> you get:
>   Package: foo
>   Version: 1.2-2
>   Build-Version: 199912111340
> The build-version is the current date in UTC in general. This prevents
> the need for finding some way to get a new versionnumber.

This still leaves us with the problem that we can't see which Source Version
was used. The version number of the binary does not need to be the same as
the source version, as the bash/libreadline example showed (IIRC).

(BTW, in the above case, I would prefer Build-Date over Build-Version).


`Rhubarb is no Egyptian god.' Debian http://www.debian.org Check Key server 
Marcus Brinkmann              GNU    http://www.gnu.org    for public PGP Key 
Marcus.Brinkmann@ruhr-uni-bochum.de,     marcus@gnu.org    PGP Key ID 36E7CD09
http://homepage.ruhr-uni-bochum.de/Marcus.Brinkmann/       brinkmd@debian.org

Reply to: