Re: Some observations regardig the progress towards Debian 3.1
On Thu, Nov 27, 2003 at 09:18:18AM +0100, Yann Dirson wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 27, 2003 at 08:59:54AM +0100, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
> > Nothing stops me from using Version 220.127.116.11.18.104.22.168.9.
> It's sure that this system of numeration only works for non-native
> Debian packages. It's not clear at all how to distinguish a NMU or a
> binary NMU on a native Debian package, without looking at the previous
> revision in the changelog file...
For source NMUs it's clearly defined in section 22.214.171.124. of your
Developer's Reference, that says a source NMU of a native package gets a
Debian revision of 0.1 .
Version : 1.0
Source NMU : 1.0-0.1
I haven't found it explicitely mentioned, but the logial version number
for a binary NMU of version 1.0 would be 1.0-0.0.1 .
Although this looks starange at a first glance, this gives a clear
version that is under all circumstances lower than the next maintainer
upload (this wouldn't be possible without adding a Debian revision to
"Is there not promise of rain?" Ling Tan asked suddenly out
of the darkness. There had been need of rain for many days.
"Only a promise," Lao Er said.
Pearl S. Buck - Dragon Seed