> IOW, I can't think of any situation where mapping VERSION_CODENAME to > osVersion would be a problem, and it's more stable. I would be happy > to > stand corrected, though!
Please don't - these notes are there to be machine-readable, so the format needs to be sensible and common, so unnecessary deviations will be detrimental to the effort. This is sourced directly from os-release, which as Julian said is set at the beginning. The optimal thing to me would sound like doing an archive-wide (ignoring arch:all only) rebuild once os-release is changed at the beginning of the cycle (and again if it were to happen later, too), so that the change can be picked up. This also solves the problem of packages not being rebuilt. And it seems like a desirable thing as you'll be using the latest compiler, with the latest hardening fixes, and so on, so it would be a win/win. If this is not possible or desirable for any reason, then please just omit the field entirely. Anything parsing it needs to expect this to be missing anyway, for the rolling distros use case. -- Kind regards, Luca Boccassi
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
-- ubuntu-devel mailing list ubuntu-devel@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel
