also sprach Grzegorz Bizon <verdan@pirx.int.pl> [2005.08.24.2359 +0200]:
> Maintainer uploads fixed package into unstable and closes bug in
> Changelog, after few days corrected package enters testing, depending on
> urgency. Granted that reported bug wasn't so important to justify
> upload do stable-proposed-updates, it still exists in stable.
As of late[0], the bug is not just marked closed, the bug is marked
as fixed in the version that has been uploaded to unstable. The
version in sarge is less than this new version, but since the bug
has been fixed only in the new version, the BTS still knows that it
continues to apply to all older versions.
0. http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2005/07/msg00010.html
>
> In recent announce about changes in BTS (Subject: BTS version tracking
> Date: Mon, 18 Jul 2005 12:06:29 +0100) is described how to use new
> versioning system. I'm not sure if sending mail to bug.no-done@b.d.o is
> now prefered way to closing bug rather than closing it in Changelog ?
The ChangeLog approach automatically records the version. To do the
same with a message to -done, you should start the -done mail like
a submit@ mail:
Package: hello
Version: 2.1.1-2
which will then mark the bug closed in 2.1.1-2 but not in 2.1.1-1.
> (I conclude that it is not possible to close bug for specific
> version, in testing, unstable and allow to remain opened in stable
> closing via Changelog, am I right ?).
Yes it is. If you write into the changelog entry for 2.1.1-2 that it
closes bug #999999, that bug will be marked closed in 2.1.1-2, but
remain open in 2.1.1-1.
> Moreover I wonder if when closing via mail should I write in
> Changelog sth like: this upload fixes bug number 1234567 in
> testing and unstable which has been closed via mail, and add tag
> sarge to bug that remain opened in &dist=stable ?
No, the sarge tag is deprecated.
> But strange thing is that:
>
> http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/pkgreport.cgi?pkg=specter&dist=stable
> and
> http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/pkgreport.cgi?pkg=specter&dist=unstable
>
> show same version, 1.4-1 is missing in the list. It's a bit
> confusing. In my opinion it may lead to misunderstandings :/. Do
> You know what I mean ?
This just shows that the bug has been found in the sarge packet. The
BTS assumes that it exists in subsequent versions too. If you want
to make that explicit, you can send a control command
found 324909 1.4-1
but that is not necessary. The important part is that a bug found in
1.0 will likely exist in 1.1 as well. If it is fixed in 1.2, it
continues to exist in 1.0 and 1.1.
found 999999 1.0
done 999999 1.2
this has exactly the above effect: the bug exists in 1.0 and 1.1,
but has been fixed in 1.2.
--
Please do not send copies of list mail to me; I read the list!
.''`. martin f. krafft <madduck@debian.org>
: :' : proud Debian developer and author: http://debiansystem.info
`. `'`
`- Debian - when you have better things to do than fixing a system
Invalid/expired PGP (sub)keys? Use subkeys.pgp.net as keyserver!
"oh what a tangled web we weave,
when first we practice to deceive."
-- shakespeare
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature (GPG/PGP)