Bug#829245: /etc/os-release: Please specify VERSION_CODENAME

This would definitely simplify our bash scripts, we currently grab the codename with this snippet: #!/bin/bash source /etc/os-release IFS=' ()' read -r _ VERSION_CODENAME <<<"${VERSION}" Thanks, Jesse

Bug#829245: /etc/os-release: Please specify VERSION_CODENAME

On Fri, 01 Jul 2016 17:34:20 +0200 Benjamin Drung wrote: > Package: base-files > Version: 9.6 > Severity: normal > > Hi, > > The os-release specification was updated in systemd > 230 to also > include a VERSION_CODENAME parameter: >

Bug#829245: /etc/os-release: Please specify VERSION_CODENAME

Hi, I also find setting VERSION_CODENAME useful. For the stable vs. testing/sid situation I would suggest that VERSION_CODENAME is only set in stable. For example "VERSION" and "VERSION_ID" are now only set on my jessie boxes, but not on my stretch boxes. We could do the same with

Bug#829245: /etc/os-release: Please specify VERSION_CODENAME

On Fri, 1 Jul 2016, Benjamin Drung wrote: > > So why don't you just declare lsb-release required for that > > particular feature to work? > > It's not one particular feature. The salt minion has grains (variables) > and oscodename is one grain that every minion has. So this value is > wrong

Bug#829245: /etc/os-release: Please specify VERSION_CODENAME

Am Freitag, den 01.07.2016, 19:17 +0200 schrieb Santiago Vila: > On Fri, 1 Jul 2016, Benjamin Drung wrote: > > > Because lsb-release is not installed on all system, but base-files > is. > > My intention for getting VERSION_CODENAME defined for jessie is to > > develop a proper fix for 

Bug#829245: /etc/os-release: Please specify VERSION_CODENAME

On Fri, 1 Jul 2016, Benjamin Drung wrote: > Because lsb-release is not installed on all system, but base-files is. > My intention for getting VERSION_CODENAME defined for jessie is to > develop a proper fix for https://github.com/saltstack/salt/issues/34423 Let's see: On a Debian 8 (jessie)

Bug#829245: /etc/os-release: Please specify VERSION_CODENAME

Am Freitag, den 01.07.2016, 18:51 +0200 schrieb Santiago Vila: > This field is defined as optional in the specification. Because not every distribution has a codename and you might have problems specifying it correctly (like on stretch/sid). > Why do we need it in os-release when we can already

Bug#829245: /etc/os-release: Please specify VERSION_CODENAME

This field is defined as optional in the specification. Why do we need it in os-release when we can already use "lsb_release -c" to know the codename and it works in stable, testing and unstable?

Bug#829245: /etc/os-release: Please specify VERSION_CODENAME

On Fri, 1 Jul 2016, Benjamin Drung wrote: > PS: You might want to update VERSION_ID and VERSION to 8.5 in jessie > too. You might want to read archived base-files bugs where this issue was already discussed. Short summary: This is how the release managers want it. Thanks.

Bug#829245: /etc/os-release: Please specify VERSION_CODENAME

Am Freitag, den 01.07.2016, 18:31 +0200 schrieb Santiago Vila: > On Fri, 1 Jul 2016, Benjamin Drung wrote: > > > Package: base-files > > Version: 9.6 > > Severity: normal > >  > > Hi, > >  > > The os-release specification was updated in systemd > 230 to also > > include a VERSION_CODENAME

Bug#829245: /etc/os-release: Please specify VERSION_CODENAME

On Fri, 1 Jul 2016, Benjamin Drung wrote: > Package: base-files > Version: 9.6 > Severity: normal > > Hi, > > The os-release specification was updated in systemd > 230 to also > include a VERSION_CODENAME parameter: >

Bug#829245: /etc/os-release: Please specify VERSION_CODENAME

Package: base-files Version: 9.6 Severity: normal Hi, The os-release specification was updated in systemd > 230 to also include a VERSION_CODENAME parameter: https://github.com/systemd/systemd/commit/646b997c118e261c5ececc434dd40d0dbdbac4d8 Please add VERSION_CODENAME to /etc/os-release,