Re: binNMU safe and ${binary:Version} or ${source:Version}
On Fri, Sep 15, 2006 at 09:47:34AM -0300, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
> On Thu, 14 Sep 2006, Steve Langasek wrote:
> > > The BIG problem is how to get the next-version. Say you have version
> > > 1.2-3. A binNMU would be 1.2-3+b1, a security release would be
> > > 1.2-3etch1 (unless there was a binNMU).
> > In the Great Scheme, these were supposed to become 1.2-3+etch1 instead of
> > 1.2-3etch1 so that security NMUs would sort higher than binNMUs...
> And they didn't because?
There simply has been no pressing need for it.
Once etch is released, there will be a large number of released packages
that have been binNMUed, so the security NMU naming scheme will need to
adapt at that point.
--
Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS
Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world.
vorlon@debian.org http://www.debian.org/
Reply to: