On Tue, Dec 19, 2006 at 05:57:00PM +1100, Nathan Scott wrote: > Hmm, my upload got rejected for some version ... I've sent off some > mail to try figure out why. > > On Tue, 2006-12-19 at 03:02 +0000, Debian Installer wrote: > > Rejected: libattr1-dev_2.4.36-1_i386.deb: old version (1:2.4.32-1.1) > in unstable >= new version (2.4.36-1) targeted at unstable. > > Rejected: libattr1_2.4.36-1_i386.deb: old version (1:2.4.32-1.1) in > unstable >= new version (2.4.36-1) targeted at unstable. > > Rejected: attr_2.4.36-1_i386.deb: old version (1:2.4.32-1.1) in > unstable >= new version (2.4.36-1) targeted at unstable. > > Rejected: attr_2.4.36-1.dsc: old version (1:2.4.32-1.1) in unstable >= > new version (2.4.36-1) targeted at unstable. > > > > === > > > > If you don't understand why your files were rejected, or if the > > override file requires editing, reply to this email.
As reports of broken sid systems rose up, Andreas Barth NMUed your package yesterday in a 0-day NMU policy. He setup an epoch to the package version which IMHO is a bad thing now that we have the possibility of ~ in version strings. He could have used 2.4.35~is.2.4.32-0.1 instead of the ugly 1:2.4.32-1.1, because from now on, you are stuck with an epoch in your package versions. Cheers, -- .''`. Aurélien GÉRÔME : :' : `. `'` Free Software Developer `- Unix Sys & Net Admin
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
