Ian Jackson [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
There are a couple of things I want to set people straight on, in this
area:
* dpkg and other packages written especially for Debian don't have a
revision number because a revision number would be meaningless and
confusing. The most recent guidelines
Bill Mitchell writes:
Bill Ian Jackson [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
Ian * dpkg and other packages written especially for Debian don't have a
Ian revision number because a revision number would be meaningless and
Ian confusing.
[...]
Bill I'm not religious on this issue, but I'd prefer it
We should require a revision number for Debian packages. Imagine someone
forgets to remove -g in the Makefile and doesn't strip the executable, or
some other oversight happens. You need a revision number to distinguish
an oversight-fix release.
If that were to happen to the upstream package for
3 matches
Mail list logo
