routine-update - epoch handling

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
2 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

routine-update - epoch handling

Steffen Möller-3
Hello,

I just updated seaview with routine update.

Now running lintian seaview_5.0.2-1_source.changes ...
E: seaview source:
epoch-changed-but-upstream-version-did-not-go-backwards 1:4.7-1 -> 5.0.2-1
W: seaview source: epoch-change-without-comment 1:4.7-1 -> 5.0.2-1
Finished running lintian.

Have manually added the epoch back in. Am not exactly sure about where
the problem is rooted since the tags or anything else don't have that
epoch in their (file)names.

Maybe someone of yours feels more confident than me to chase this up.

Cheers,

Steffen

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: routine-update - epoch handling

Andreas Tille-5
Hi Steffen,

On Fri, May 15, 2020 at 01:36:53PM +0200, Steffen Möller wrote:

> I just updated seaview with routine update.
>
> Now running lintian seaview_5.0.2-1_source.changes ...
> E: seaview source: epoch-changed-but-upstream-version-did-not-go-backwards
> 1:4.7-1 -> 5.0.2-1
> W: seaview source: epoch-change-without-comment 1:4.7-1 -> 5.0.2-1
> Finished running lintian.
>
> Have manually added the epoch back in. Am not exactly sure about where the
> problem is rooted since the tags or anything else don't have that epoch in
> their (file)names.
>
> Maybe someone of yours feels more confident than me to chase this up.

Since we have a package now it should be possible to write a proper bug
report.  I admit it happened to me as well once I had a package with
epoch.  I decided to save my time when facing this border case but for
sure that should be fixed.  So having a record in BTS rather than a
random mail to the mailing list seems to be sensible.

Kind regards

     Andreas.

--
http://fam-tille.de