-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Thu, 6 Oct 2005 12:30:28 +0100 Colin Watson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 06, 2005 at 01:09:59PM +0200, Sven Luther wrote: > > On Thu, Oct 06, 2005 at 06:45:13PM +0900, Horms wrote: > > > I am, right at this moment, building 2.6.13-1.experimental.1, and > > > > This should be 2.6.13-0.experimental.1, which would be lower than > > 2.6.13-1 which we would upload to unstable. Don't forget to make > > sure you include the .orig tarball though, as i don't think it is > > included in 0.experimental.1 by default. > > That ought to be 2.6.13-0experimental1, otherwise various bits of the > archive maintenance software will treat it as a binary-only NMU in > some ways and get confused. I've made that mistake before ... Oh, didn't know that. Is it (pseudo)documented anywhere? I think I experienced once that a 0alphanum1 would not get upgraded automatically to a 0alphanum2 package. But if this is the proper way then I must've been dreaming. - Jonas - -- * Jonas Smedegaard - idealist og Internet-arkitekt * Tlf.: +45 40843136 Website: http://dr.jones.dk/ - Enden er nær: http://www.shibumi.org/eoti.htm -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFDRRaln7DbMsAkQLgRAiqvAKCUX1ru4UsRuXO35Wl9BWyXP3WS+wCfSFBH 6ORFqBP18np6OiYLHuBKyjQ= =cz2g -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
