Re: /etc/debian_version for Etch
On Sun, Jun 12, 2005 at 06:45:25PM -0600, Bob Proulx wrote:
> Paul E Condon wrote:
> > Jochen Schulz wrote:
> > > Jerome BENOIT:
> > > > I have just migrate to Etch, and I have a naive question.
> > > > My current /etc/debian_version file still contains "3.1",
> > > > which is valid release for Sarge:
> > > > 1] what must /etc/debian_version contain for an Etch box ?
> > > This is not yet decided, I think. The file is part of the package
> > > base-files and will be updated if there is a consesus on the version
> > > number for etch.
>
> The number is at this time not decided. It is picked by the release
> manager for the release. At this time I do not believe a release
> number for Etch has been announced.
>
> > > > 2] does it really matter ?
> > >
> > > No. The file is just there to help scripts find out the version
> > > currently installed but I am not aware of any important things depending
> > > on it.
>
> Agreed.
>
> > This seems to me to be a very un-Debian state of affairs. Is there a bug
> > report about this? Is it help to a script to give a manifestly wrong
> > answer to such a straightforward question?
>
> There is no bug there. And to me it seems very Debian. What problem
> does this cause?
It purports to be information that is available to script writers
when, if fact, it is not information. It does not, in and of itself,
cause a problem. It just misleads script writers into believing that
there is a really simple way to determine the Debian version, when in
fact there is not. At least not by reading this file. It would not be
a bug if it were totally undocumented and given another name so that
script writers who notice it would not assume falsely that it is
useful.
--
Paul E Condon
pecondon@mesanetworks.net
Reply to: