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

Re: testing-proposed-updates security fix for koffice



* Martin Schulze (joey@infodrom.org) [041026 16:25]:
> Colin Watson wrote:
> > On Tue, Oct 26, 2004 at 03:14:10PM +0200, Martin Schulze wrote:
> > > Matthias Urlichs wrote:
> > > > Hi, Ben Burton wrote:
> > > > > The fixed package version will be 1:1.3.2-1.sarge.2
> > > > 
> > > > That's a version number which looks like a binary NMU, which AFAIK causes
> > > > problems.

> > > We would use 1:1.3.2-1sarge2 for a security update, but either should
> > > be fine.
> > > 
> > > Matthias, where would the above version cause problems?
 
> > It appears to confuse britney a bit at the moment.
 
> Hmm.  Which dot is the problem?  The last one or the last but one?

Any one - a debian version of 1.sarge.2 is interpreted as bin-only NMU
of version 1.sarge. If you had already 1.sarge.1 in (which is also a
bin-only NMU in britneys terms), than this creates a bang.


Cheers,
Andi
-- 
   http://home.arcor.de/andreas-barth/
   PGP 1024/89FB5CE5  DC F1 85 6D A6 45 9C 0F  3B BE F1 D0 C5 D1 D9 0C



Reply to: