Re: Bug#508772: Please allow base-files 5 in lenny
On Mon, 15 Dec 2008, Rene Engelhard wrote:
> Santiago Vila wrote:
> > BTW: Should I worry about Bug#508772? This is the very first time in
> > 10 years that someone seems unconvenienced by seeing a version number
> > like 5.0 in unstable for a few weeks. Are there really packages which
> > break because of this? If not, I feel that the BTS is being abused.
> If it wouldn't break stuff I wouldn't have filed this as a "important" bug
> (but as minor)
> openoffice.org 3.x is already prepared for lenny backports and does that
> based on checking lsb_releases output.
Ok, some questions:
* Why don't you worry about lenny backports after lenny is stable? I thought
it was a policy for *-backports that packages reach testing first, which
is not obviouslty the case.
* Is lsb_release really required for that? Is not there any other
way to achieve the same result?
* What about release in lsb_*release*? One could argue that trying to
apply release properties to things which are not released is not the
way to go.