On Wed, Dec 9, 2015 at 14:02:41 +0000, Wookey wrote: > +++ Jakub Wilk [2015-12-09 14:47 +0100]: > > Looks like a fallout after #620112. > > This change in sbuild should be reverted. It didn't fix binNMU > > co-installability, and made binMNU changelog entries less helpful. > > It may not have fixed binNMU co-installability on its own, but it > looks to me as if it was a necessary part of solving that issue? Has > it been superceded by changes in changelog handling for binNMUs (I > vaguely recall some changes in this area but am not sure what the > current state is)? > > i.e it's not clear to me that this should simply be reverted because > it is 'misleading'. Not-breaking MA:same co-installability with > binNMUs is an important goal IMHO. > It's entirely unnecessary, because a binNMU's changelog now ends up in /usr/share/doc/$package/changelog.$arch.gz, which doesn't clash with other architectures since it's arch-qualified. So yes, the change in sbuild should be reverted. Cheers, Julien
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature