Re: May one use ~rc1 within versions although older lintians are complaining?
Am Mittwoch, 21. März 2007 schrieb Manoj Srivastava: On Tue, 13 Mar 2007 15:56:44 -0300, Margarita Manterola [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: On 3/13/07, Roman Müllenschläder [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm packaging for debian right now and wanted to now if I may use a version number like: 1.0.8~rc1-1 ? If you use that number, the upstream version should be 1.0.8~rc1. Is that the upstream number? If you want to have release candidates of your _own_ package, you should do: 1.0.8-1~rc1 Hmm? Suppose upstream version is currently 1.07 released, and they are planning on releasing 1.08 in the future. Now they are running through 1.08 release candidates, and so we have 1.08 rc1, soon to be followed by 1.08 rc2. The upstream version variables, used by them, are all at 1.08 (not 1.08 '~'. How do you propose the debian releases of the release candidates be numbered? When upstream releases, upstream releases shall have 1.08, 1.08.1 or 1.08-1, and so on. The upstream currently released is 1.0.8.2. Coming is 1.0.8.3 followed by 1.0.9, if there isn't a 1.0.8.4 ;) The devel-branch therefore is 1.0.9. So I'm only doing packages of _released_ upstreams, not of a devel-branch. As long as the upstream is not fullfilling the needs to be sponsored and uploaded, I do test-debs and provide them on my own repository, to let users use them for testing purposes. Therefore the upstream stays the same (1.0.8.2 - as long as 1.0.8.3 is not released) but the debs change to get them perfect. Thus having 1.0.8.2-1~rcX as versions for my 'unofficial' packages. Debian release will be not until 1.0.8.3 and therefore with version 1.0.8.3-1. Until that I maybe do unofficial 1.0.8.3-1~rcX again for testing and to let debian release be 1.0.8.3-1. So ~rcX only counts for the debian package state, not upstream. Was that your question? With doing these unofficial-own-repository-releases, I hope to get the packages be tested more than I am able to do alone. Cause of 1.0.8.3-1~rcX 1.0.8.3-1, once officially uploaded to debian, the packages get updated and debian-release version is correct ... only thing that has to be done is shrinking the changelog ;) Lg Roman
Re: May one use ~rc1 within versions although older lintians are complaining?
On Thu, 22 Mar 2007 09:37:16 +0100, Roman Müllenschläder [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: Am Mittwoch, 21. März 2007 schrieb Manoj Srivastava: On Tue, 13 Mar 2007 15:56:44 -0300, Margarita Manterola [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: On 3/13/07, Roman Müllenschläder [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm packaging for debian right now and wanted to now if I may use a version number like: 1.0.8~rc1-1 ? If you use that number, the upstream version should be 1.0.8~rc1. Is that the upstream number? If you want to have release candidates of your _own_ package, you should do: 1.0.8-1~rc1 Hmm? Suppose upstream version is currently 1.07 released, and they are planning on releasing 1.08 in the future. Now they are running through 1.08 release candidates, and so we have 1.08 rc1, soon to be followed by 1.08 rc2. The upstream version variables, used by them, are all at 1.08 (not 1.08 '~'. How do you propose the debian releases of the release candidates be numbered? When upstream releases, upstream releases shall have 1.08, 1.08.1 or 1.08-1, and so on. The upstream currently released is 1.0.8.2. Coming is 1.0.8.3 followed by 1.0.9, if there isn't a 1.0.8.4 ;) [Bunch of irrelevant stuff snipped] Was that your question? If you read above, nothing to do with the example you are quoting, which is a mere red herring. The distinction between the cases is that in my example the upstream is releasing release candidates, and not the Debian developer. My contention is that if the Debian maintainer wants to ship release candidates from upstream, then it is perfectly acceptable to use 1.0.8~rc1-1. manoj -- An entire fraternity of strapping Wall-Street-bound youth. Hell - this is going to be a blood bath! -- Post Bros. Comics Manoj Srivastava [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.debian.org/~srivasta/ 1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B 924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: May one use ~rc1 within versions although older lintians are complaining?
Am Donnerstag, 22. März 2007 schrieb Manoj Srivastava: On Thu, 22 Mar 2007 09:37:16 +0100, Roman Müllenschläder [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: Am Mittwoch, 21. März 2007 schrieb Manoj Srivastava: On Tue, 13 Mar 2007 15:56:44 -0300, Margarita Manterola [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: On 3/13/07, Roman Müllenschläder [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm packaging for debian right now and wanted to now if I may use a version number like: 1.0.8~rc1-1 ? If you use that number, the upstream version should be 1.0.8~rc1. Is that the upstream number? If you want to have release candidates of your _own_ package, you should do: 1.0.8-1~rc1 Hmm? Suppose upstream version is currently 1.07 released, and they are planning on releasing 1.08 in the future. Now they are running through 1.08 release candidates, and so we have 1.08 rc1, soon to be followed by 1.08 rc2. The upstream version variables, used by them, are all at 1.08 (not 1.08 '~'. How do you propose the debian releases of the release candidates be numbered? When upstream releases, upstream releases shall have 1.08, 1.08.1 or 1.08-1, and so on. The upstream currently released is 1.0.8.2. Coming is 1.0.8.3 followed by 1.0.9, if there isn't a 1.0.8.4 ;) [Bunch of irrelevant stuff snipped] Was that your question? If you read above, nothing to do with the example you are quoting, which is a mere red herring. The distinction between the cases is that in my example the upstream is releasing release candidates, and not the Debian developer. My contention is that if the Debian maintainer wants to ship release candidates from upstream, then it is perfectly acceptable to use 1.0.8~rc1-1. manoj Aha ... now we know ;) Lg Roman
Re: May one use ~rc1 within versions although older lintians are complaining?
On Tue, 13 Mar 2007 15:56:44 -0300, Margarita Manterola [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: On 3/13/07, Roman Müllenschläder [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm packaging for debian right now and wanted to now if I may use a version number like: 1.0.8~rc1-1 ? If you use that number, the upstream version should be 1.0.8~rc1. Is that the upstream number? If you want to have release candidates of your _own_ package, you should do: 1.0.8-1~rc1 Hmm? Suppose upstream version is currently 1.07 released, and they are planning on releasing 1.08 in the future. Now they are running through 1.08 release candidates, and so we have 1.08 rc1, soon to be followed by 1.08 rc2. The upstream version variables, used by them, are all at 1.08 (not 1.08 '~'. How do you propose the debian releases of the release candidates be numbered? When upstream releases, upstream releases shall have 1.08, 1.08.1 or 1.08-1, and so on. manoj -- When people say nothing, they don't necessarily mean nothing. Manoj Srivastava [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.debian.org/~srivasta/ 1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B 924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: May one use ~rc1 within versions although older lintians are complaining?
On Thu, Mar 15, 2007 at 06:40:43AM +0100, Adrian von Bidder wrote: If you're building packages for Debian, you should use a Debian machine, not an Ubuntu machine. FWIW, you can install cross-distro chroots and use them to build packages if you need to. Not necessarily recommended for official-quality packages, but I have spun versions of my packages for Ubuntu users in the past with success, using a chroot. Debian's debootstrap package even appears to have some script files for it (though nothing more recent than breezy). You'd have to pull down the Ubuntu debootstrap package to extract scripts for edgy/feisty. Hamish -- Hamish Moffatt VK3SB [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: May one use ~rc1 within versions although older lintians are complaining?
Am Mittwoch, 14. März 2007 schrieb Gunnar Wolf: Please set up the headers accordingly in your mail client :) What's wrong with my headers? Lg Roman
Re: May one use ~rc1 within versions although older lintians are complaining?
Am Mittwoch, 14. März 2007 schrieb Gunnar Wolf: Roman Müllenschläder dijo [Tue, Mar 13, 2007 at 08:43:56PM +0100]: So, why are you using a version that's not the one in testing, nor the one in stable? Because my laptop, where I'm building the packages on, is running Edgy ;) I know I'm stating the obvious here ... but you shouldn't try to develop packages for Debian exclusively on Ubuntu systems. You won't be able to test your packages. Not being able to test your packages is generally considered a Bad Thing. (Or you at least tell your sponsor this package has not been tested on Debian, right?) Why is every question I'm asking here treated like me beeing a child in time, not able to do the logical? Testing a package is useless and senseless ... I know that well! HUH!?!? Ummmh... If that's how you really feel and I'm not failing to understand some deep sarcastic remark, I invite you to keep those packages away from Debian. Isn't it ironic ;) Lg Roman And PLS! STOP CC'ing me!!
Re: May one use ~rc1 within versions although older lintians are complaining? (Closed)
Am Dienstag, 13. März 2007 schrieb Roman Müllenschläder: Hi there ... I'm packaging for debian right now and wanted to now if I may use a version number like: 1.0.8~rc1-1 ? Reason is the following: I have this packages on my repository for making it available to users for testing puposes. I know that the initial release should be 1.0.8-1. So if I do updates on the package now, I can't increment the version (which is now 1.0.8-1). So my wish would be to use 1.0.8~rc1-1/2/3... until initial release which will be 1.0.8-1 then. My version of lintian is 1.23.22 and it gives error if I use this version number and I'm fearing these error prevent the package from beeing sponsored !? Lg Roman Ok ... thx for your answers to this! Beside building and testing my packages in a proper way (pbuilder and clean installations in vmware - because of my packgage beeing a graphical one, I decided to use a graphical system for testing, not chroot) I just mis-used lintian ;( So my question came up cause of this unproper usage, was my fault and is therfore answered. Lg Roman
Re: May one use ~rc1 within versions although older lintians are complaining?
On Thursday 15 March 2007 11:31, Roman Müllenschläder wrote: Am Mittwoch, 14. März 2007 schrieb Gunnar Wolf: Please set up the headers accordingly in your mail client :) What's wrong with my headers? Nothing AFAICS, at least not according to the Code of Conduct of these mailing lists. Gunnar might be thinking of Mail-Followup-To or setting Reply-To to the list yourself, but the fact is that it isn't well-defined how to setup the mail header to express all your preferences for replies and followups. -- Magnus Holmgren[EMAIL PROTECTED] (No Cc of list mail needed, thanks) pgpekkubxgx22.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: May one use ~rc1 within versions although older lintians are complaining?
Hi, Roman Müllenschläder wrote: The problem is that the mentioned lintian warning was fixed in .27 .. so if testing and unstable are using .28, there should be no problem with just ignoring the warnings for now and see what my _tests_ on debian will No, that's wrong. *Build* also on Debian (in a sid chrot). Then you don't get the warning in the first place and there's nothing to ignore at all. announce! You claim to test it on Debian but doesn't even run the lintian from Debian? Regards, Rene -- .''`. Ren� Engelhard -- Debian GNU/Linux Developer : :' : http://www.debian.org | http://people.debian.org/~rene/ `. `' [EMAIL PROTECTED] | GnuPG-Key ID: 248AEB73 `- Fingerprint: 41FA F208 28D4 7CA5 19BB 7AD9 F859 90B0 248A EB73 signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: May one use ~rc1 within versions although older lintians are complaining?
Am Mittwoch, 14. März 2007 schrieb Rene Engelhard: Hi, Roman Müllenschläder wrote: The problem is that the mentioned lintian warning was fixed in .27 .. so if testing and unstable are using .28, there should be no problem with just ignoring the warnings for now and see what my _tests_ on debian will No, that's wrong. *Build* also on Debian (in a sid chrot). Then you don't get the warning in the first place and there's nothing to ignore at all. announce! You claim to test it on Debian but doesn't even run the lintian from Debian? So easiest way to use chroot (I'm using pbuilder) with linda/lintian is to make a hookdir, copy over B90linda from examples to the hookdir and run: pbuilder-sid build package.dsc --hookdir ./hookdir ? Or are there easier ways of using linda/lintian with pbuilder? Lg Roman
Re: May one use ~rc1 within versions although older lintians are complaining?
Roman Müllenschläder dijo [Tue, Mar 13, 2007 at 08:23:16PM +0100]: The versions for lintian (from packages.qa.debian.org) are: Stable: 1.23.8 Testing:1.23.28 Unstable: 1.23.28 So, why are you using a version that's not the one in testing, nor the one in stable? Because my laptop, where I'm building the packages on, is running Edgy ;) Maybe I should compile lintian by hand ... tried using sources from feisty but they need to much dependencies ... Umh... If you are building packages for Debian, I strongly suggest you set up a complete chroot environment (i.e. not just using pbuilder, but having all tools such as linda/lintian you use for packaging). It will make your life much easier, and will allow you to test your work. I haven't really played with cowbuilder/cowdancer, but that might also fit your needs. Greetings, -- Gunnar Wolf - [EMAIL PROTECTED] - (+52-55)5623-0154 / 1451-2244 PGP key 1024D/8BB527AF 2001-10-23 Fingerprint: 0C79 D2D1 2C4E 9CE4 5973 F800 D80E F35A 8BB5 27AF -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: May one use ~rc1 within versions although older lintians are complaining?
Roman Müllenschläder dijo [Tue, Mar 13, 2007 at 08:43:56PM +0100]: So, why are you using a version that's not the one in testing, nor the one in stable? Because my laptop, where I'm building the packages on, is running Edgy ;) I know I'm stating the obvious here ... but you shouldn't try to develop packages for Debian exclusively on Ubuntu systems. You won't be able to test your packages. Not being able to test your packages is generally considered a Bad Thing. (Or you at least tell your sponsor this package has not been tested on Debian, right?) Why is every question I'm asking here treated like me beeing a child in time, not able to do the logical? Testing a package is useless and senseless ... I know that well! HUH!?!? Ummmh... If that's how you really feel and I'm not failing to understand some deep sarcastic remark, I invite you to keep those packages away from Debian. Greetings, -- Gunnar Wolf - [EMAIL PROTECTED] - (+52-55)5623-0154 / 1451-2244 PGP key 1024D/8BB527AF 2001-10-23 Fingerprint: 0C79 D2D1 2C4E 9CE4 5973 F800 D80E F35A 8BB5 27AF -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: May one use ~rc1 within versions although older lintians are complaining?
Roman Müllenschläder dijo [Wed, Mar 14, 2007 at 12:16:31AM +0100]: If you're developing packages for Debian, not Ubuntu, I would suggest at a minimum that you do your builds in a Sid chroot (pbuilder and/or UML work well for this too, depending on how powerful your system is). I do packaging solely for Debian and yet I *still* use a chroot to build, and usually a virtual server when testing out the results. Second time in this thread I have to tell that I'm not baking my packages in an oven and pray they will run on debian ... This was not my question! I had a straight question and did already get the answer. Thx anyway ... Xcuse for beeing that rude, but it's the 5th mail I send to debian lists and always got arrogant answers. Is this a way for DD's to show they are different, better or what? For nearly 5 years I work with opensource and love debian! But my efforts since the last 3 month of making debian packages showed up a complete different side ... sadly! Giving me an impression of elitist. How comes? Umh... sorry for making your life even more miserable with a sixth and seventh answer in the same path ;-) We Debianers tend to have low social skills, and for one, I apologize if I'm making you feel unwelcome. Much to the contrary - But we _will_ continue making this point: We care more about the quality of the end product than about being nice people. It is fundamental for Debian that the packages are buildable in the target systems, that they are well tested by the maintainers, and that the maintainers are familiar with the tasks their packages need to do. If you state you are not running Debian in your build system, well... I would not be surprised at having some reactions ;-) Btw. pls stop cc'ing me! I'm subscribed and hate deleting neddless mails! Please set up the headers accordingly in your mail client :) Greetings, -- Gunnar Wolf - [EMAIL PROTECTED] - (+52-55)5623-0154 / 1451-2244 PGP key 1024D/8BB527AF 2001-10-23 Fingerprint: 0C79 D2D1 2C4E 9CE4 5973 F800 D80E F35A 8BB5 27AF -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: May one use ~rc1 within versions although older lintians are complaining?
On Wed, Mar 14, 2007 at 12:28:31PM -0600, Gunnar Wolf wrote: Why is every question I'm asking here treated like me beeing a child in time, not able to do the logical? Testing a package is useless and senseless ... I know that well! HUH!?!? Ummmh... If that's how you really feel and I'm not failing to understand some deep sarcastic remark, I invite you to keep those packages away from Debian. Don't worry Gunnar, Roman *is* being sarcastic. His packages are, IMHO, very well done and they have quite some testing from himself and from users. Actually, I'd sponsor him if I were able. -- Rodrigo Gallardo GPG-Fingerprint: 7C81 E60C 442E 8FBC D975 2F49 0199 8318 ADC9 BC28 Zenophobia: the irrational fear of convergent sequences. signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: May one use ~rc1 within versions although older lintians are complaining?
On Tuesday 13 March 2007 20.23:16 Roman Müllenschläder wrote: Because my laptop, where I'm building the packages on, is running Edgy ;) Maybe I should compile lintian by hand ... tried using sources from feisty but they need to much dependencies ... If you're building packages for Debian, you should use a Debian machine, not an Ubuntu machine. If you're building debs for Ubuntu, you should discuss with the Ubuntu developers if ~ in version numbers is ok with all of their tools. If you're building packages just for yourself: I think all the relevant tools can cope with ~ for quite some time now, so you can ignore the lintian warning. cheers -- vbi -- A user will find any interface design intuitive...with enough practice. pgpJQvRo8qO33.pgp Description: PGP signature
May one use ~rc1 within versions although older lintians are complaining?
Hi there ... I'm packaging for debian right now and wanted to now if I may use a version number like: 1.0.8~rc1-1 ? Reason is the following: I have this packages on my repository for making it available to users for testing puposes. I know that the initial release should be 1.0.8-1. So if I do updates on the package now, I can't increment the version (which is now 1.0.8-1). So my wish would be to use 1.0.8~rc1-1/2/3... until initial release which will be 1.0.8-1 then. My version of lintian is 1.23.22 and it gives error if I use this version number and I'm fearing these error prevent the package from beeing sponsored !? Lg Roman -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: May one use ~rc1 within versions although older lintians are complaining?
On 3/13/07, Roman Müllenschläder [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm packaging for debian right now and wanted to now if I may use a version number like: 1.0.8~rc1-1 ? If you use that number, the upstream version should be 1.0.8~rc1. Is that the upstream number? If you want to have release candidates of your _own_ package, you should do: 1.0.8-1~rc1 My version of lintian is 1.23.22 and it gives error if I use this version number and I'm fearing these error prevent the package from beeing sponsored !? What's the error given by lintian? The versions for lintian (from packages.qa.debian.org) are: Stable: 1.23.8 Testing:1.23.28 Unstable: 1.23.28 So, why are you using a version that's not the one in testing, nor the one in stable? -- Besos, Marga
Re: May one use ~rc1 within versions although older lintians are complaining?
Am Dienstag, 13. März 2007 schrieb Margarita Manterola: On 3/13/07, Roman Müllenschläder [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm packaging for debian right now and wanted to now if I may use a version number like: 1.0.8~rc1-1 ? If you use that number, the upstream version should be 1.0.8~rc1. Is that the upstream number? If you want to have release candidates of your _own_ package, you should do: 1.0.8-1~rc1 So the versions will be 1.0.8-1~rc1(2,3,4) ? My version of lintian is 1.23.22 and it gives error if I use this version number and I'm fearing these error prevent the package from beeing sponsored !? What's the error given by lintian? It gives: bad-version-number and bad-version-in-relation depends: The versions for lintian (from packages.qa.debian.org) are: Stable: 1.23.8 Testing:1.23.28 Unstable: 1.23.28 So, why are you using a version that's not the one in testing, nor the one in stable? Because my laptop, where I'm building the packages on, is running Edgy ;) Maybe I should compile lintian by hand ... tried using sources from feisty but they need to much dependencies ... LG Roman
Re: May one use ~rc1 within versions although older lintians are complaining?
hi roman, On Tue, 2007-03-13 at 20:23 +0100, Roman Müllenschläder wrote: Am Dienstag, 13. März 2007 schrieb Margarita Manterola: On 3/13/07, Roman Müllenschläder [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm packaging for debian right now and wanted to now if I may use a version number like: 1.0.8~rc1-1 ? If you use that number, the upstream version should be 1.0.8~rc1. Is that the upstream number? If you want to have release candidates of your _own_ package, you should do: 1.0.8-1~rc1 So the versions will be 1.0.8-1~rc1(2,3,4) ? i would disagree and suggest your original versioning scheme with 1.0.8~rc1-1. or, if upstream isn't using that particular naming scheme, you might want to make it clearer with 1.0.8~somethingthatidentifiesyou1-1 or something similar. my rationale is that if you do 1.0.8-1~rc1, you're in effect saying that it *is* upstream version 1.0.8, (and a debian revision -1). but if you do 1.0.8~foo-1, you're saying that it's upstream version 1.0.8. but that's just imho, maybe there are arguments for doing it the other way as well. sean signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: May one use ~rc1 within versions although older lintians are complaining?
On 3/13/07, sean finney [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Tue, 2007-03-13 at 20:23 +0100, Roman Müllenschläder wrote: If you use that number, the upstream version should be 1.0.8~rc1. Is that the upstream number? If you want to have release candidates of your _own_ package, you should do: 1.0.8-1~rc1 So the versions will be 1.0.8-1~rc1(2,3,4) ? Yes. i would disagree and suggest your original versioning scheme with 1.0.8~rc1-1. or, if upstream isn't using that particular naming scheme, you might want to make it clearer with 1.0.8~somethingthatidentifiesyou1-1 or something similar. my rationale is that if you do 1.0.8-1~rc1, you're in effect saying that it *is* upstream version 1.0.8, (and a debian revision -1). but if you do 1.0.8~foo-1, you're saying that it's upstream version 1.0.8. My suggestion was only for the case when the upstream version _IS_ 1.0.8, and the maintainer is relasing release candidates of the Debian package, not of the upstream version. If the release candidates are of the 1.0.8 version itself, then the original tarball should be called foo_1.0.8~rc1.orig.tar.gz, and lintian shouldn't complain. -- Besos, Marga
Re: May one use ~rc1 within versions although older lintians are complaining?
[Roman Müllenschläder] So, why are you using a version that's not the one in testing, nor the one in stable? Because my laptop, where I'm building the packages on, is running Edgy ;) I know I'm stating the obvious here ... but you shouldn't try to develop packages for Debian exclusively on Ubuntu systems. You won't be able to test your packages. Not being able to test your packages is generally considered a Bad Thing. (Or you at least tell your sponsor this package has not been tested on Debian, right?) signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: May one use ~rc1 within versions although older lintians are complaining?
Am Dienstag, 13. März 2007 schrieb Peter Samuelson: [Roman Müllenschläder] So, why are you using a version that's not the one in testing, nor the one in stable? Because my laptop, where I'm building the packages on, is running Edgy ;) I know I'm stating the obvious here ... but you shouldn't try to develop packages for Debian exclusively on Ubuntu systems. You won't be able to test your packages. Not being able to test your packages is generally considered a Bad Thing. (Or you at least tell your sponsor this package has not been tested on Debian, right?) Why is every question I'm asking here treated like me beeing a child in time, not able to do the logical? Testing a package is useless and senseless ... I know that well! SCNR Lg Roman
Re: May one use ~rc1 within versions although older lintians are complaining?
Am Dienstag, 13. März 2007 schrieb Margarita Manterola: On 3/13/07, sean finney [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Tue, 2007-03-13 at 20:23 +0100, Roman Müllenschläder wrote: If you use that number, the upstream version should be 1.0.8~rc1. Is that the upstream number? If you want to have release candidates of your _own_ package, you should do: 1.0.8-1~rc1 So the versions will be 1.0.8-1~rc1(2,3,4) ? Yes. i would disagree and suggest your original versioning scheme with 1.0.8~rc1-1. or, if upstream isn't using that particular naming scheme, you might want to make it clearer with 1.0.8~somethingthatidentifiesyou1-1 or something similar. my rationale is that if you do 1.0.8-1~rc1, you're in effect saying that it *is* upstream version 1.0.8, (and a debian revision -1). but if you do 1.0.8~foo-1, you're saying that it's upstream version 1.0.8. My suggestion was only for the case when the upstream version _IS_ 1.0.8, and the maintainer is relasing release candidates of the Debian package, not of the upstream version. That's the case! If the release candidates are of the 1.0.8 version itself, then the original tarball should be called foo_1.0.8~rc1.orig.tar.gz, and lintian shouldn't complain. Now that well! The problem is that the mentioned lintian warning was fixed in .27 .. so if testing and unstable are using .28, there should be no problem with just ignoring the warnings for now and see what my _tests_ on debian will announce! Thx Roman
Re: May one use ~rc1 within versions although older lintians are complaining?
On Tue, Mar 13, 2007 at 08:23:16PM +0100, Roman Müllenschläder wrote:
[...]
Because my laptop, where I'm building the packages on, is running
Edgy ;)
[...]
If you're developing packages for Debian, not Ubuntu, I would
suggest at a minimum that you do your builds in a Sid chroot
(pbuilder and/or UML work well for this too, depending on how
powerful your system is). I do packaging solely for Debian and yet I
*still* use a chroot to build, and usually a virtual server when
testing out the results.
--
{ IRL(Jeremy_Stanley); PGP(9E8DFF2E4F5995F8FEADDC5829ABF7441FB84657);
SMTP([EMAIL PROTECTED]); IRC([EMAIL PROTECTED]); ICQ(114362511);
AIM(dreadazathoth); YAHOO(crawlingchaoslabs); FINGER([EMAIL PROTECTED]);
MUD([EMAIL PROTECTED]:6669); WWW(http://fungi.yuggoth.org/); }
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: May one use ~rc1 within versions although older lintians are complaining?
Am Dienstag, 13. März 2007 schrieb The Fungi: On Tue, Mar 13, 2007 at 08:23:16PM +0100, Roman Müllenschläder wrote: [...] Because my laptop, where I'm building the packages on, is running Edgy ;) [...] If you're developing packages for Debian, not Ubuntu, I would suggest at a minimum that you do your builds in a Sid chroot (pbuilder and/or UML work well for this too, depending on how powerful your system is). I do packaging solely for Debian and yet I *still* use a chroot to build, and usually a virtual server when testing out the results. Second time in this thread I have to tell that I'm not baking my packages in an oven and pray they will run on debian ... This was not my question! I had a straight question and did already get the answer. Thx anyway ... Xcuse for beeing that rude, but it's the 5th mail I send to debian lists and always got arrogant answers. Is this a way for DD's to show they are different, better or what? For nearly 5 years I work with opensource and love debian! But my efforts since the last 3 month of making debian packages showed up a complete different side ... sadly! Giving me an impression of elitist. How comes? Lg Roman Btw. pls stop cc'ing me! I'm subscribed and hate deleting neddless mails!
Re: May one use ~rc1 within versions although older lintians are complaining?
Roman Müllenschläder [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Am Dienstag, 13. März 2007 schrieb The Fungi: On Tue, Mar 13, 2007 at 08:23:16PM +0100, Roman Müllenschläder wrote: Because my laptop, where I'm building the packages on, is running Edgy ;) If you're developing packages for Debian, not Ubuntu, I would suggest at a minimum that you do your builds in a Sid chroot (pbuilder and/or UML work well for this too, depending on how powerful your system is). [...] Second time in this thread I have to tell that I'm not baking my packages in an oven and pray they will run on debian ... I'm not sure why you mention it here. The post you're replying to contains a suggestion to build in a chroot; it says nothing to suggest you're doing things improperly. Xcuse for beeing that rude, but it's the 5th mail I send to debian lists and always got arrogant answers. Is this a way for DD's to show they are different, better or what? You may be reading unpleasant things where they are not in the message. Btw. pls stop cc'ing me! I'm subscribed and hate deleting neddless mails! I concur. This practice (copies of messages to people who didn't ask for them) is against the explicit code of conduct for the Debian mailing lists URL:http://www.debian.org/MailingLists/#codeofconduct. -- \ If you do not trust the source do not use this program. -- | `\ Microsoft Vista security dialogue | _o__) | Ben Finney -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
