Your message dated Tue, 13 Aug 2013 17:09:54 +0200 (CEST)
with message-id <[email protected]>
and subject line Re: base-files: Please add VERSION entry to /etc/os-release
for unstable/testing too
has caused the Debian Bug report #675731,
regarding base-files: Please add VERSION entry to /etc/os-release for
unstable/testing too
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.
(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this
message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system
misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact [email protected]
immediately.)
--
675731: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=675731
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact [email protected] with problems
--- Begin Message ---
Package: base-files
Version: 6.8
Severity: wishlist
As requested in http://bugs.debian.org/659853 Debian now includes
/etc/os-release. Therefore, I'd like to drop the lsb-release
dependency from epiphany-browser. We use three pieces of info for the
OS-specific part of the useragent: the distro name, the distro
version, and the package version. Those three pieces (and some
punctuation) currently result in "Debian/unstable (3.4.2-1)" or
"Ubuntu/12.10 (3.5.1-0ubuntu1)".
I'd like to use the ID and VERSION fields of /etc/os-release to fill
in these fields, but Debian's implementation does not include a
VERSION entry except for stable releases. I'd like to propose setting
both VERSION and VERSION_ID to "wheezy". This can be distinguished
from the released form because it doesn't include the version number
(i.e 7.0). I believe the useragent generated would then be
"debian/wheezy (3.4.2-2)". (I don't want to use the NAME field as the
extra slash in GNU/Linux might not play well with useragent
parsers...)
Also, you should probably include HOME_URL and BUG_REPORT_URL values.
Thanks,
Jeremy
-- System Information:
Debian Release: wheezy/sid
APT prefers quantal-updates
APT policy: (500, 'quantal-updates'), (500, 'quantal-security'),
(500, 'quantal'), (100, 'quantal-backports')
Architecture: amd64 (x86_64)
Kernel: Linux 3.4.0-3-generic (SMP w/2 CPU cores)
Versions of packages base-files depends on:
ii gawk [awk] 1:4.0.1+dfsg-2
ii mawk [awk] 1.3.3-17
base-files recommends no packages.
base-files suggests no packages.
-- no debconf information
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
As explained in the second email in this bug report, the os-release
specification allows for VERSION not to be defined when you are in a
rolling release, which is exactly what testing and unstable are.
Therefore, relying on this being always defined is a mistake, and what
you guys are asking is basically that such mistake works when it does
not have to work.
To summarize, I don't think it is a good idea.
Yes, we have /etc/debian_version, and that would be probably wrong for
non-stable releases, but it's too late to fix that one. We are still
in time to not make the same mistake with os-release, however.
Thanks.
--- End Message ---
