[Drbd-dev] 0.7.5 debian stuff

[Drbd-dev] 0.7.5 debian stuff

[Alexander Opitz]

Hi,

> I like the fact that drbd0.7 conflicts drbd << 0.7, but do we think 
> 0.6.x is no longer being used?  If we upload this package into debian, 
> how would we ever be able to upload a newer version of the 0.6.x series?

The conflict is correct.

If you update the drbd package to a newer 0.6.x version, the drbd package is 
updated and still conflicts with drbd0.7 ... but if you do not have drbd0.7 
installed, then you see the newer drbd package from the 0.6 series.

You also can update the drbd0.7 package to a newer version with this conflict 
to drbd, the conflict doesn't stop the debian upload process, it only helps 
the user to do not make stupid installations.

My first thought was: "And for note, a debian package can't named drbd0.7 
(with point) ... the normal way for such transitions is to add the next 
higher number to the end of package name ... so you have then drbd (old name) 
and drbd1 (new name)."

but as you can see for the libswig package a point in name is possible:

http://packages.debian.org/cgi-bin/search_packages.pl?version=all&subword=1&exact=&arch=any&releases=all&case=insensitive&keywords=libswig&searchon=names

It have likely same conflict/update setup.

Greetings Alex//

[Drbd-dev] 0.7.5 debian stuff

[David Krovich]

I started looking at the debian directory released with the 0.7.5 
tarball.  Since we're changing some things around, how about the following?

Have the drbd source package create 2 binary packages, one named 
drbd-utils and one named drbd-modules-source.  I think those would be 
much cleaner names for the binary packages.

I like the fact that drbd0.7 conflicts drbd << 0.7, but do we think 
0.6.x is no longer being used?  If we upload this package into debian, 
how would we ever be able to upload a newer version of the 0.6.x series?

Re: [Drbd-dev] 0.7.5 debian stuff

[Philipp Hug]

On Monday 04 October 2004 16.30, David Krovich wrote:
> Have the drbd source package create 2 binary packages, one named
> drbd-utils and one named drbd-modules-source.  I think those would be
> much cleaner names for the binary packages.
>
agreed... I'll change them

> I like the fact that drbd0.7 conflicts drbd << 0.7, but do we think
> 0.6.x is no longer being used?  If we upload this package into debian,
> how would we ever be able to upload a newer version of the 0.6.x series?
actually, I thought we'd put drbd0.6 into sarge and drbd0.7 into unstable/sid.
but if you want to have both in sid, you'd need two different source packages.
does it really make sense to keep 0.6 in unstable as upstream isn't working on 
it anymore and has already started the 0.8 branch...?
(or am I wrong here?)

in my opinion, the only reason for having 0.6 packages is to make sure that 
existing 0.6 users don't get automatically upgraded to 0.7.
so, what we have to do is: rename the current packages to drbd0.6 and put them 
into sarge...
then we can start uploading the drbd0.7 version to unstable...

philipp