Bug#382826: Patch to use source version for binary-only NMU'd packages

2007-08-20 Thread Matt Kraai
tag 382826 patch thanks The attached patch makes apt-get strip the binary-only NMU suffix from the binary package version to construct the source package version. I've tested that it allows me to use apt-get source on packages that have had binary-only NMUs. If I should regenerate it against a

Bug#382826: Patch to use source version for binary-only NMU'd packages

2007-08-20 Thread Simon Richter
Hi, Matt Kraai wrote: The attached patch makes apt-get strip the binary-only NMU suffix from the binary package version to construct the source package version. I've tested that it allows me to use apt-get source on packages that have had binary-only NMUs. I think we should rather fix the

Bug#382826: Patch to use source version for binary-only NMU'd packages

2007-08-20 Thread Matt Kraai
On Mon, Aug 20, 2007 at 02:00:31PM +0200, Simon Richter wrote: Matt Kraai wrote: The attached patch makes apt-get strip the binary-only NMU suffix from the binary package version to construct the source package version. I've tested that it allows me to use apt-get source on packages that

Bug#382826: Patch to use source version for binary-only NMU'd packages

2007-08-20 Thread Simon Richter
Hi, Matt Kraai wrote: [apt-get source does not work on binNMU'd packages] I think we should rather fix the binNMU process. The +b[0-9]* thing is only a convention, after all, and there are others in use (e.g. when backporting). I don't have a problem with changing the binNMU process, but

Bug#382826: Patch to use source version for binary-only NMU'd packages

2007-08-20 Thread Matt Kraai
On Tue, Aug 21, 2007 at 04:06:21AM +0200, Simon Richter wrote: In principle, every Package entry in Packages needs a Source field that points to the source package name and version number; the version number is optional if it is the same as the binary package version, the entire field is