On Sat, 2015-09-26 at 14:35 +0200, Wouter Verhelst wrote: > On Thu, Sep 24, 2015 at 11:56:56AM +0100, Colin Watson wrote: > > On Thu, Sep 24, 2015 at 12:29:59PM +0200, Santiago Vila wrote: > > > But once we are able to trigger a rebuild with sourceful NMUs, as > > > Ubuntu does, binNMUs will hopefully be a thing of the past. > > > > Amusingly, the way we do it in Ubuntu is a huge hassle in some cases, > > and at least some of us would rather have binNMUs. (That's partly > > because it's a manual process; if it were automated it would be better, > > but it still wouldn't solve the problem that in some cases you really do > > want to do single-architecture rebuilds without having to rebuild a > > stack of packages on slower architectures entirely unnecessarily. Hi, > > Haskell.) > > So. > > binNMU's are special in that they're linked (in the dak db) to a source > with a different version than the binary package. [...] That's not specific to binNMUs. E.g. linux-latest always builds binaries with different version numbers from the source. Ben. -- Ben Hutchings Any smoothly functioning technology is indistinguishable from a rigged demo.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part