it's not really a version 5.99.0.

I made a mistake last week while preparing a current snapshot of all
relevant KiCad parts and the kicad package was of course intended for
uploading to the distribution experimental but was pushed into
unstable/sid due stupidity of me.

To fix this error I needed to upload a greater version into the archive
than the previous upload as DAK (the Debian Archive Kit) is checking for
this condition and will reject the upload otherwise, the Debian system
is only supporting upgrades and no downgrades.
Another option would have been to use a epoch, that prefix with a colon
before the typical version number string. E.g. *1:*5.1.9 could I've been

But introducing epochs need to go through consensus on the list
debian-devel as these are often avoidable and not really needed. And I
think this here is a case there no need for an epoch is required and I
have chosen to simply increase the version numbering from a POV of DAK
and created a version 5.99.0+really5.1.9.

The underlying source is still 5.1.9.

I need to stay with this schema until 6.x will get released (6.x is
greater than 5.99.x), even for the backported versions. I'm really not
proud about the mistake I've made but it's happen. :-(

This will also have effect for Ubuntu and their downstreams as the PPA
version will also became less than 5.99.0+really once the Debian
version(s) will hit the Ubuntu archive and users wouldn't be able to
install packages from PPA archives in case they have previously
installed kicad package from the Ubuntu archive.

There are two solution for this case people want to use the PPA versions
of kicad.

Option A:
 - The PPA versioning doesn't adopt the version schema from Debian

People can't have installed kicad packages from the Ubuntu archive
before, if they have installed the kicad package from Ubuntu they need
to be removed first!

Option B
 - The PPA archive is also using the versioning schema from Debian

In this case users doesn't have to do anything than to add the PPA
entries as it's already done yet right now.

My suggestion is to do the latter, so the names, versions and behaviour
will stay the same on all Debian based distributions.

This all is only relevant for the non nightly packages as this is using
a different package name!


Mailing list:
Post to     :
Unsubscribe :
More help   :

Reply via email to