On Tue, 10 Aug 2010, Steve Langasek wrote: > On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 12:52:12PM -0400, Don Armstrong wrote: > > IF bug is assigned to at least one currently existing package > > and all packages assigned existed at some point THEN > > do nothing > > ELSE > > bug tbm > > I think that sounds sane, yes. > > > However, in this case, there never was a binary package > > openldap2.3; in etch, the source package was openldap2.3 which > > also built the openldap binary package, so assigning it to only > > the openldap binary package should be perfectly fine, and doesn't > > lose history. > > Only because the BTS semantics for handling of source packages were > changed post-hoc and no effort was made to fix up the bug data to > comply with the newly-imposed rules. But that's a bug report for > another day.
We never really handled source packages at all, actually. [We just sort of assumed that a bug assigned to a package for which there wasn't a corresponding binary package was assigned to a source package with that name.] I think the only reasonable method is to go through bug reports which are assigned to a binary package for which the binary package doesn't exist, but the corresponding source package does, and reassign them... but I haven't done that because I'm terminally lazy. > > [If you wanted to have it specifically assigned to both, then it > > should be assigned to src:openldap2.3 and src:openldap... but I > > don't really see the point.] > > In this particular case the benefit of recording that the bug was > present in all versions of a package only present in oldstable and > earlier is minimal. But in other cases (incl. future cases), there > may be richer data available, such as information about versions of > the package that the bug is closed in that may be useful to admins > of systems that are desperately in need of upgrade, or useful in the > aggregate. Right, but those cases will still work if it was assinged to the openldap binary package; doing a version-only found command will automatically resolve the version to the appropriate source package, assuming the binary package the bug is assigned to is correct. [The only case where this would matter, I guess, is if in the future there was an upload of the openldap2.3 source package which shipped an openldap2.3 binary package which conflicted with the openldap binary package provided by the >> 2.3 versions of openldap. Don't really see that happening, though.] Don Armstrong -- The game of science is, in principle, without end. He who decides one day that scientific statements do not call for any further test, and that they can be regarded as finally verified, retires from the game. -- Sir Karl Popper _The Logic of Scientific Discovery_ ยง11 http://www.donarmstrong.com http://rzlab.ucr.edu -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
