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

Re: New field proposed, UUID

On Wed, Nov 29, 2000 at 05:08:22PM -0500, Itai Zukerman wrote:
> > Sooner or later sigs will start traveling around with .deb's (that's
> > another discussion, save it for later, it is coming soon). When those sigs
> > are changed or updates by the archive maintainers or the release manager,
> > the md5sum of the package will change, but the UUID will remain the same.
> I would prefer that *any* modification to a .deb increment its
> version.

That would be bad. Do that and then the Packages file needs regenerating,
the package needs to be re-signed by everyone, and things will get upgraded,
and apt[1] will redownload it all over again, just because of something
changing like an internal signature by the archive maintainer (think
signing all packages for a release).


[1] I know apt will do that now, but using a UUID, means apt can use that
instead, and only upgrade packages who's version is newer, or who's UUID
has changed (if the version remains the same).

This also gives us another good reason for UUID's. We can now have a
mechanism to do binary-only uploads for ports, without changing the
version number (if you think binary-only uploads are harmless with a
version change, then you haven't noticed the problems with sparc-potato
when I did a binary-only upload of gnome stuff to fix some dep problems).

/  Ben Collins  --  ...on that fantastic voyage...  --  Debian GNU/Linux   \
`  bcollins@debian.org  --  bcollins@openldap.org  --  bcollins@linux.com  '

Reply to: