Re: Survex debian package uninstallable on hppa
On Thu, Dec 28, 2006 at 02:38:52PM +0000, Wookey wrote:
> On 2006-12-26 17:44 +0000, Olly Betts wrote:
> > On Tue, Dec 26, 2006 at 12:28:47PM +0100, Luk Claes wrote:
> > > What about 1.0.39+upstream-1 or something similar?
> > Well, there's nothing upstream specific here either! But it does the
> > job so I'm happy to go with it, assuming Wookey (cc:-ed) is.
> The +ver syntax is reserved for binNMU's - right? So this suggestion
> is to build an hppa version from the new sources and compatible with
> them then upload it with 1.0.39+b2 (or +upstream-1) which will sort
> higher than the exsiting one and become installable?
> Or am I misunderstanding and the +ver syntax can be used for a
> sourceful upload too?
The version numbers reserved for binNMUs are +b<num> in the Debian revision
(or, if it's a native package, with the effect seen above :/).
It's expected that + will also be used eventually for security NMUs.
You can use a + however you want to in an upstream version number.
> I can do that, although I think my debian login has been broken since
> the great compromise of 2004 (despite several ttempts to fix it). This
> provides an incentive to finally sort it out (in order to log on to an
> hppa build box).
Hmm, not that having access to hppa would have mattered here, the nature of
the problem required a sourceful upload.
Cheers,
--
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: