On Wed, Jan 18, 2006 at 12:06:19PM +0100, Reinhard Tartler wrote: > On 1/18/06, Bill Allombert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Wed, Jan 18, 2006 at 10:47:35AM +0100, Reinhard Tartler wrote: > > > On 1/17/06, Bill Allombert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > 1) No changes rebuild-only upload should still be versionned so that we > > > > do not end up with two .deb with the same version but different > > > > contents. Rebuilding a package with a newer toolchain can cause > > > > different dependencies and bugs. > > > > > > In ubuntu, no changes rebuild-only get the suffix 'buildX' or > > > 'ubuntuX+1', depending if it has already diverged. Packages with > > > 'buildX' suffix get synced automatically on the next upload to debian. > > > > Are you sure ? Compare the menu package at > > <http://packages.ubuntu.com/dapper/admin/menu> > > with the one in sid. They have the same versions (2.1.27) but not the > > same content (at least the dependencies are different.) > > No buildX or ubuntuX suffix. > > As pointed out several times, the source package in the ubuntu archive > is NOT different to the source package in the debian archive. The > binary package have been rebuilt in an different environment, which > can caus different dependencies on the resulting binary package.
Yes, this is the definition of a no changes rebuild-only upload. What I asked was precisely that such upload should be versionned nevertheless. Debian version binNMU even while there is no source changes. Cheers, Bill. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
