** Tags added: disco
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to the bug report.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/19353
Title:
Tools relying on /etc/debian_version get confused
To manage notifications about this bug go to:
** Tags added: cosmic
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to the bug report.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/19353
Title:
Tools relying on /etc/debian_version get confused
To manage notifications about this bug go to:
** Tags added: bionic
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to the bug report.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/19353
Title:
Tools relying on /etc/debian_version get confused
To manage notifications about this bug go to:
** Tags added: artful
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to the bug report.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/19353
Title:
Tools relying on /etc/debian_version get confused
To manage notifications about this bug go to:
** Tags added: zesty
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to the bug report.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/19353
Title:
Tools relying on /etc/debian_version get confused
To manage notifications about this bug go to:
** Tags added: yakkety
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to the bug report.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/19353
Title:
Tools relying on /etc/debian_version get confused
To manage notifications about this bug go to:
Christian Hofstädtler and Mark Brown, thank you for your contributions
to this bug. I read all bugs I comment on and do not use a bot. I did
not know how to check it, now I do ;) Despite this, while your opinions
on the triviality of bug reproduction and Mark's opinion on bug post
comment syntax
While triage is useful work this sort of automated posting to bugs
asking for information which can be trivially obtained really doesn't
help the reputation of Ubuntu's bug handling - there's clearly nobody
actually looking at the bug, and making users do busy work to deal with
the bots is just
Thank you for posting this bug.
Does this occur in Lucid?
** Changed in: base-files (Ubuntu)
Status: Confirmed = Incomplete
--
Tools relying on /etc/debian_version get confused
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/19353
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
/etc/debian_version is still in Lucid and Maverick, and it's contents is
still open to debate. You could've looked this up yourself.
** Changed in: base-files (Ubuntu)
Status: Incomplete = Confirmed
--
Tools relying on /etc/debian_version get confused
Bug triage is a time consuming and often quite boring job which should
be appreciated. It makes sense to ask the subscribers of a bug if
they're still bothered by it, I think. Because that's the whole point of
triage: the ones who are able to fix the bugs, should spend time fixing
them, not on
Amber-
Why mark this Fix-Committed?
Where is the fix?
** Changed in: base-files (Ubuntu)
Status: Fix Committed = Incomplete
** Changed in: base-files (Ubuntu)
Status: Incomplete = Confirmed
--
Tools relying on /etc/debian_version get confused
** Changed in: base-files (Ubuntu)
Status: Confirmed = Incomplete
** Changed in: base-files (Ubuntu)
Status: Incomplete = Confirmed
** Changed in: base-files (Ubuntu)
Status: Confirmed = Fix Committed
--
Tools relying on /etc/debian_version get confused
I have learned that some Linux distributions don't offer the lsb_release
executable (in their default set of packages) but *do* have an /etc/lsb-
release file. Therefore, writers of tools are advised to try parsing
the /etc/lsb-release file, even though the format of that file is not
part of the
For what it is worth, the standard way to find out what distribution you
are on is to execute lsb_release:
first standardized in 2001:
http://refspecs.freestandards.org/LSB_1.0.0/gLSB/lsbrelease.html
current standard:
http://refspecs.freestandards.org/LSB_3.2.0/LSB-Core-generic/LSB-Core-
Jergen, I think you're missing the point here - /etc/debian_version is mostly
for use by tools
and lets them know that they're running on something that looks roughly like
Debian.
But it's not. The presence of the file shows the the machine is Debian,
the content of the file says which
I firstly thought that it wasn't used anymore and it should be deprecated.
After reading the comments, well.. you are right, if tools require it, it is
necessary :)
--
Tools relying on /etc/debian_version get confused
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/19353
You received this bug notification
Jergen, I think you're missing the point here - /etc/debian_version is
mostly for use by tools and lets them know that they're running on
something that looks roughly like Debian. Given how close the Ubuntu
infrastructure is to Debian it's still reasonable to assert that and
removing the file
I think the file *should* be removed
Ubuntu uses the file at the moment for two reasons:
..that various system configuration tools automatically saw Ubuntu as a
Debian derivative..
Reason 1: For tools to see Ubuntu as a Debian derivative
But Ubuntu Hardy is not the same as lenny/sid, as
19 matches
Mail list logo
