:: Re: [devuan-dev] New patches for eu…
Top Page
Delete this message
Reply to this message
Author: Olaf Meeuwissen
Date:  
To: Daniel Reurich
CC: devuan developers internal list
Subject: Re: [devuan-dev] New patches for eudev (3.2.2-8+devuan2)
Hi Daniel,

Daniel Reurich writes:

> On 04/12/17 23:54, Olaf Meeuwissen wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> Watching from the side lines,
>>
>> KatolaZ writes:
>>
>>> On Sun, Dec 03, 2017 at 06:39:03PM +0100, Jaromil wrote:
>>>> On Sun, 03 Dec 2017, Daniel Reurich wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>    Eudev being a directly packaged should have a version of <upstream
>>>>>    version>-<build version> and not have an additional +<devuanX.Y> which is
>>>>>    currently only used for our modified rebuilt version of debian packages.
>>>>>    So the correct version should be 3.2.2-9 in this case.

>>>>>
>>>>>    For updates, we can add +<suite version>u<N>, and backports +bpoN, and
>>>>>    security can have +<suite or suiteversion>securityN

>>>>>
>>>>>    In this way we follow the same convention as debian uses, and provide a
>>>>>    clear indicator where we override a debian package.

>>>>>
>>>>>    Of course this is all up for discussion, but I suggest until we can decide
>>>>>    on and document a good reason to break with this convention we should do
>>>>>    so.

>>>>
>>>> I tend to agree with Daniel here, since this package is not forked
>>>> from Debian we don't need to add +devuan. Lets hear more opinions.
>>>
>>> I agree with Dan and Jaromil. If something is not forked from Debian,
>>> we don't need to use the +devuanX.Y convention, IMHO.
>>
>> I agree with you as well but was wondering what would happen if such a
>> directly packaged package appeared in Debian. Probably unlikely to the
>> extreme for eudev, but what about other packages that Devuan packaged
>> first?
>>
> Conceivably we could then choose to use debian's package, either build
> from source or drop our binary and uses the one debian provides
> (assuming it's free of systemd infection), but then the appropriate
> naming rules would also apply.
>
>> How would the existence of such packages affect the way Devuan now
>> merges the Debian packages into its own package repositories?
>>
> Devuan would be unaffected, as Devuan built packages always take
> precedence at a merge, even if debian has newer versions.


Thanks.

>> Just wondering,


Wondering no more.
--
Olaf Meeuwissen, LPIC-2            FSF Associate Member since 2004-01-27
 GnuPG key: F84A2DD9/B3C0 2F47 EA19 64F4 9F13  F43E B8A4 A88A F84A 2DD9
 Support Free Software                        https://my.fsf.org/donate
 Join the Free Software Foundation              https://my.fsf.org/join