Re: Version numbering for security uploads of native packages
"Adam D. Barratt" <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
> On Sun, 2008-03-16 at 09:06 +0100, Bas Wijnen wrote:
>> [Adding bug #437392 to Cc, which deals with this issue for normal
>> NMUs, because I'm making a suggestion about them.]
>> On Sat, Mar 15, 2008 at 11:52:55PM +0000, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
>> > devscripts 2.10.19 (soon to be uploaded) will modify the behaviour of
>> > "debchange --nmu" to version an NMU of a native package as X+nmu1
>> > rather than the current X-0.1.
>> Good idea. Even better, IMO, would be to use a system which is in
>> line with non-native packages. How about this rule:
> [using X.1]
>> IMO this solution is slightly better than +nmu1, because it makes
>> versions of native and non-native packages more uniformly mangled.
>> However, any solution is better than no solution. :-)
> That does seem the most logical suggestion thus far.
I dislike this approach because it makes it impossible for tools like
Lintian to recognize NMUs of native packages and perform other
NMU-specific checks (such as making sure an appropriate changelog entry is
present). There's no way of knowing whether a native package with a
version number of 1.2.1 is an NMU or not.
I like the +nmuN approach.
Russ Allbery (email@example.com) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>