From unknown Fri Mar 29 08:15:24 2024 Received: (at 416) by bugs.devuan.org; 30 Mar 2020 13:30:06 +0000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: devuanbugs@dyne.org Received: from tupac3.dyne.org [195.169.149.119] by doc.devuan.org with IMAP (fetchmail-6.4.0.beta4) for (single-drop); Mon, 30 Mar 2020 13:30:06 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mx.hindley.org.uk (mohindley.plus.com [81.174.245.179]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by vm6.ganeti.dyne.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 98576F60884 for <416@bugs.devuan.org>; Mon, 30 Mar 2020 15:23:42 +0200 (CEST) Received: from apollo.hindleynet ([192.168.1.3] helo=apollo) by mx.hindley.org.uk with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1jIuOC-0008C2-1b; Mon, 30 Mar 2020 14:23:40 +0100 Received: from mark by apollo with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1jIuOB-00019M-8o; Mon, 30 Mar 2020 14:23:39 +0100 Date: Mon, 30 Mar 2020 14:23:39 +0100 From: Mark Hindley To: Olaf Meeuwissen Cc: 416@bugs.devuan.org Subject: Re: bug#416: elpa-debian-el: Reports go to the Debian BTS Message-ID: <20200330132339.GI3924@hindley.org.uk> References: <8736a03a50.fsf@boson> <20200323141242.GL3924@hindley.org.uk> <87pncvn67j.fsf@member.fsf.org> <20200329095924.GF3924@hindley.org.uk> <87bloejbpv.fsf@member.fsf.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <87bloejbpv.fsf@member.fsf.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12) X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.0 required=5.0 tests=SPF_PASS autolearn=disabled version=3.4.2 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on tupac3.dyne.org On Mon, Mar 30, 2020 at 08:58:36PM +0900, Olaf Meeuwissen wrote: > > Yes, client-side. We can use 'Origin: Devuan' in our packages to distinguish in > > reportbug once all Devuan's packages have that added to their source > > debian/control. > > Good, but can't you use the package's version already? I thought that > all repackaged packages have to add a `devuan` in their version. > I just ran > > dpkg-query -W | grep devuan > > on my ASCII machine and only devuan-keyring didn't have `devuan` in its > version. I think that's fair enough. Are there other Devuan specific > packages that do not follow this rule of thumb? Yes, a few. Notably elogind, eudev, consolkit2, some themes, refractainstaller, choose-init, and several others that still have the (very old?) +vuaN numbering. The problem with using +devuanN in the version as the test is that these package reports would then be sent to Debian which would be unpopular! > > That seems bizzarre behaviour! Maybe that is worth bugging Debian about? > > I am thinking about doing so but I'll have to find some time to do so. > Maybe next weekend. My SANE activities eat up most of my free time at > the moment. > > Hope this helps, Yes, many thanks. Mark