On Fri, Jul 08, 2022 at 01:34:49PM +0200, Axel Beckert wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Alberto Contreras wrote:
> > When I invoke `lintian` over a package with a version like
> > `22.2-64-g1fcd55d6-0ubuntu1~22.10.1` it emits
> > `binary-nmu-debian-revision-in-source` and
> > `source-nmu-has-incorrect-version-number` source warnings. This looks like
ISTR that source-nmu-* just wasn't issued under ubuntu (i.e. with
--profile=ubutnu), did it start to be issued now? I don't have any
recollection about binary-nmu-*
If I dreamt the whole thing, then perhaps it should be done, because the
concept of NMU doesn't exist in Ubuntu, so the tag as a whole doesn't
make sense.
That said, AFAIK -0ubuntu1~22.10.1 is not a formally documented version
anywhere, though I have seen it a few times.
Alberto: what kind of upload is this? 22.10 is the current dev version,
so it's not some kind of backport. With such context, I can guess that
this is some kind of package that your team is maintianing for multiple
ubuntu branches, in which case I'd expect you to follow the SRU
versioning, which prescribe -0ubuntu0.22.10.1 instead.
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/SecurityTeam/UpdatePreparation#Update_the_packaging
I must also add that using . instead of ~ is fraught with catches, as
documented by, for example, https://lintian.debian.org/tags/dfsg-version-with-period
So I'd advocate a change in that policy, which hasn't been touched for
at least a decade (when I started contributing to ubuntu packages…)
> Note to myself: There's a similar albeit not identical issue reported
> in https://bugs.debian.org/1001399.
♥ Axel :)
--
regards,
Mattia Rizzolo
GPG Key: 66AE 2B4A FCCF 3F52 DA18 4D18 4B04 3FCD B944 4540 .''`.
More about me: https://mapreri.org : :' :
Launchpad user: https://launchpad.net/~mapreri `. `'`
Debian QA page: https://qa.debian.org/developer.php?login=mattia `-
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature