Re: re-introduction of epoch? #1037190 dhcpcd: version is lower than in wheezy

[Martin-Éric Racine <martin-eric.racine@iki.fi>]

On Sat, Jun 17, 2023 at 12:40 PM Étienne Mollier <emollier@emlwks999.eu> wrote:
> Martin-Éric Racine, on 2023-06-16:
> > Someone filed a bug asking to re-introduce an epoch.
> >
> > An older fork of the same package back in Wheezy last featured the epoch.
> >
> > Personally, I'm fine with either marking the bug as WONTFIX or
> > re-introducing the epoch for one specific binary target whose name
> > matches what was last seen in Wheezy. I simply want to hear what is
> > the mailing list's concensus.
>
> The bug seems to only affect your binary package dhcpcd, so
> maybe a possible option could be to move ressources provided by
> the dhcpcd package to dhcpcd5 and remove the dhcpcd package.  It
> would avoid you the epoch bump and the hassle to handle the
> version bump from the old fork, but it also might confuse people
> using the package.  What do you think?

If you look at the other open bug, the point precisely was to get rid
of the 5 completely.

I found a simple override that would re-introduce the epoch only for
bin:dhcpcd (but not for bin:dhcpcd-base or the transitional
bin:dhcpcd5). I however wonder whether this is worth the trouble,
given how far back the last occurrence of bin:dhcpcd goes. This being
said, archive policy might mandate doing this even if the last
occurrence of bin:dhcpcd dates back from 2016.

Martin-Éric