On Fri, Jan 18, 2013 at 11:06:45PM +0000, Thorsten Glaser wrote: > What's up with this base-files stuff? That's the second high-profile package > I notice needing to put in a switch on it, and I’ve locally noticed even more > and re-instated my lsb-release #624769 workaround in all sid chroots and buildd > to get this fixed *again*: > root@aranym:~ # cat /var/cache/pbuilder/base.cow/etc/lsb-release > DISTRIB_RELEASE=unstable > DISTRIB_CODENAME=sid > I ask for just timely processing base-files into wheezy and getting a fixed > version back into sid. Or just *never* having a version of base-files in sid > declare wheezy as version, and have base-files always go via t-p-u. > Can't be *that* hard, and while t-p-u may be “not nice”, breaking lots of > packages that used to rely on lsb-release is worse. > Alternatively, I ask all buildd admins to install /etc/lsb-release scripts > into all of their chroots. (Doing that for cowbuilder is much harder, > unfortunately, as it must be done manually, and only if it targets sid.) I don't see in your message any explanation of why you think the current handling is a problem; bug #624769 doesn't appear to be related to base-files in any way. It would be reasonable to do uploads of base-files to t-p-u instead of unstable for stable release prep, but it also seems entirely unnecessary. -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. Ubuntu Developer http://www.debian.org/ slangasek@ubuntu.com vorlon@debian.org
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature