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

Re: Version for a returning package



On 12-05-13 at 10:51am, Chris Knadle wrote:
> On Sunday, May 13, 2012 06:28:03, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
> > On 12-05-13 at 11:49am, Samuel Thibault wrote:
> > > Mike Hommey, le Sun 13 May 2012 11:16:13 +0200, a écrit :
> > > > The versions they had by then had an epoch. Supposedly, to make 
> > > > the new versions greater than these, I have to add an epoch. But 
> > > > do I really need to care about making the new versions greater 
> > > > than these packages last seen 4 years ago? (sarge EOL was in 
> > > > 2008)
> > > 
> > > There are installed systems which upgraded from sarge up to 
> > > squeeze which can still have the old package installed. (I mean 
> > > systems, not machines, the system is migrated from an hdd to 
> > > another to save reconfiguration etc.)
> > 
> > Yes, some systems have packages installed that Debian do not 
> > support: Debian do not support keeping obsolete packages installed.
> > 
> > That said, it is not _forbidden_ to track version numbers of Ubuntu, 
> > debian-multimedia.org and obsolete Debian distro releases.
> 
> Just to let you know:
> debian-multimedia.org has just switched domain names to 
> deb-multimedia.org
> 
> I think this was done to comply with Debian's policy on domain name 
> usage.

Not yet switched but renewed the old name, advertising new site one only 
in words - not technically with 301 redirection (yes, unsupported by APT 
but could be put on e.g. front page), and recently renewing old site: 
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/pkg-multimedia-maintainers/2012-May/026787.html


 - Jonas

-- 
 * Jonas Smedegaard - idealist & Internet-arkitekt
 * Tlf.: +45 40843136  Website: http://dr.jones.dk/

 [x] quote me freely  [ ] ask before reusing  [ ] keep private

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature


Reply to: