Re: Please allow base-files 5 in lenny
On Wed, 17 Dec 2008, Adeodato Simó wrote:
> We are going to introduce a package that ships a "lsb_release" file, and
> we're going to handle it via the proposed-<suite> suites. Hopefully
> lsb-release (the program) will move to using that file, but I'm know
> thinking it could be reasonable to move debian_version and issue{,.net}
> to this package, what do you think?
If we manage to move those files without generating extra questions
when the user didn't change them, I would be happy to do that.
Rene Engelhard wrote:
> FTR, I never disputed that. But it should be fixed for sid as soon
> as base-files 5 migrated at least by reintroducing
> "testing/unstable" in there till we have a proper solution..
I'll repeat what I said in the BTS as it seems you didn't read it:
debian_version is *not* reliable if you are using testing or unstable.
Please note that the file is called debian_VERSION, not debian_DISTRIBUTION.
A version refers to a RELEASED version, like 4.0 or 5.0.
The fact that debian_version says testing/unstable or lenny/sid most
of the time during testing development cycle is just a nice thing, not
something which is mandated by policy or promised anywhere. At least for now.
In particular, you should never use debian_version (either directly or
indirectly) to differentiate between testing and unstable (as they are sides
of the same coin). Hence, you should not use it to differentiate
between lenny and sid. Not until lenny is stable, that is.
Reply to: