Bug#916877: lintian: check that 1.2-3~debXuY changelog stanza follows a 1.2-3 changelog stanza
Hi, On Tue, Dec 25, 2018 at 07:23:12PM +, Chris Lamb wrote: > Hi Salvatore, > > > IIRC this particular change was actually not based on a rebuild of the > > unstable's one but an import of 3.4.2 on top of the previous stretch > > packaging. > > Getcha. This sounds like a case that is special enough that it is fine > for Lintian to warn about normally, no? > > (I mean, IMHO it's actually sometimes nice to see a Lintian warning > when you are know you are doing something slightly out of the > ordinary, if only for the confirmation that you are doing it as you > intend.) yes sure probably yes. I just wanted to hilight that this was such a case where it was not based on a rebuild of the upper suite version. Thanks for your work on lintian! Regards, Salvatore
Bug#916877: lintian: check that 1.2-3~debXuY changelog stanza follows a 1.2-3 changelog stanza
Hi Salvatore, > IIRC this particular change was actually not based on a rebuild of the > unstable's one but an import of 3.4.2 on top of the previous stretch > packaging. Getcha. This sounds like a case that is special enough that it is fine for Lintian to warn about normally, no? (I mean, IMHO it's actually sometimes nice to see a Lintian warning when you are know you are doing something slightly out of the ordinary, if only for the confirmation that you are doing it as you intend.) Regards, -- ,''`. : :' : Chris Lamb `. `'` la...@debian.org / chris-lamb.co.uk `-
Bug#916877: lintian: check that 1.2-3~debXuY changelog stanza follows a 1.2-3 changelog stanza
Hi, On Wed, Dec 19, 2018 at 08:50:09PM +0100, Andreas Beckmann wrote: > Package: lintian > Severity: wishlist > > Hi, > > I just wanted to answer "Is #910434 fixed in sid?" but the changelog > entry is inconclusive ... > > > spamassassin (3.4.2-1~deb9u1) stretch; urgency=high > > * lots of changes > > spamassassin (3.4.1-8) unstable; urgency=medium > > * lost of changes > ... > > > I would rather have liked to see something > > > spamassassin (3.4.2-1~deb9u1) stretch; urgency=high > > * Rebuild for stretch. > * With this additional change. > > spamassassin (3.4.2-1) unstable; urgency=high > > * lots of changes > > spamassassin (3.4.1-8) unstable; urgency=medium > > * lost of changes > ... > > > IMO, a 1.2-3~debXuY changelog stanza should always be accompanied by a > 1.2-3 changelog stanza, so that implies using -v$currentversioninstable > IIRC this particular change was actually not based on a rebuild of the unstable's one but an import of 3.4.2 on top of the previous stretch packagaging. As such the version should maybe have been choosen as 3.4.2-0+deb9u1, but was not a rebuild for stretch of the 3.4.2-1. Thus although the choosen version might not have been optimal for this case, it would have been wrong to add 3.4.2-1 stanza before the 3.4.2-1~deb9u1 and thus lintian warn about this. As said, I think if it was a fresh import the version should rather have been 3.4.2-0+deb9u1 instead. Regards, Salvatore
Bug#916877: lintian: check that 1.2-3~debXuY changelog stanza follows a 1.2-3 changelog stanza
Package: lintian Severity: wishlist Hi, I just wanted to answer "Is #910434 fixed in sid?" but the changelog entry is inconclusive ... spamassassin (3.4.2-1~deb9u1) stretch; urgency=high * lots of changes spamassassin (3.4.1-8) unstable; urgency=medium * lost of changes ... I would rather have liked to see something spamassassin (3.4.2-1~deb9u1) stretch; urgency=high * Rebuild for stretch. * With this additional change. spamassassin (3.4.2-1) unstable; urgency=high * lots of changes spamassassin (3.4.1-8) unstable; urgency=medium * lost of changes ... IMO, a 1.2-3~debXuY changelog stanza should always be accompanied by a 1.2-3 changelog stanza, so that implies using -v$currentversioninstable Perhaps lintian could nag a bit about this ... maybe similar to "backports changes missing" Andreas
