On Sun, 23 Jan 2022 at 15:12:49 -0600, Richard Laager wrote:
> > > 2. I create transitional binary packages in src:ntpsec:
>
> I got to thinking about this more. This won't work, because src:ntp is
> 1:4.2.8p15+dfsg-1 and src:ntpsec is 1.2.1+dfsg1-2. I would need an epoch (of
> 2, since ntp already has an epoch of 1) on ntpsec in order for src:ntpsec's
> transitional bin:ntp package to be newer than src:ntp's bin:ntp package.
>
> It might be technically possible to build a binary package with different
> versioning
It is.
> but even if it is: 1) I don't know how, and 2) I'm not sure
> whether that's a good idea, especially compared to the alternatives.
1) something like this (untested) will give you ntpsec_1.2.1+dfsg1-2
and ntp_2:1.2.1+dfsg1-2 packages:
override_dh_gencontrol:
dh_gencontrol -pntp -- -v2:$(DEB_VERSION_UPSTREAM_REVISION)
dh_gencontrol --remaining-packages
2) If you are going to build ntp.deb from src:ntpsec, then I think this
is a lot better than adding an epoch to the whole source package (i.e.
d/changelog) of src:ntpsec, because it can eventually go away (when the
transitional package does).
I'm not sure whether building transitional packages from src:ntpsec with
this technique is better or worse than having a src:ntp that only builds
transitional packages.
smcv
