Hi,
Some more info in this IRC discussion
09:15 < adsb> without having checked the specifics, the likely answer is "get a
newer devscripts into bullseye-backports", I suspect
09:46 < manphiz> adsb: I see. Would be great to upgrade the server to Bookworm
to get more newer tools, but I guess that probably requires more work.
09:47 < doge-tech> manphiz: Yep, I was just taking a look at that but as a
minimum it would require upgrading from postgresql 13 to 16. I may take
another look when I've got a bit more time, unless lucas
already has.
09:47 < doge-tech> Backporting devscripts will be easier and quicker, for sure
09:48 < adsb> well lucas also can't actually do the upgrade :)
09:49 < adsb> but yes, with the DSA hat on installing a single package backport
is a thing we can easily do. upgrades are still a little less so sadly
09:49 < manphiz> ah db upgrade...
09:52 < doge-tech> Looks like there's already an updated devscripts in
bullseye-backports-sloppy
09:54 < adsb> presumably from testing
09:54 < adsb> if bookworm's version is sufficient, then that could go to
bullseye-backports, afair the policies
09:55 < adsb> and ullmann (udd.d.o) will already be configured to support that
09:55 < adsb> -sloppy less so
09:57 < doge-tech> bookworm has 2.23.4, which includes the "v?" check but not
the "[Vv]?". Still a worthwhile improvement, IMO.
09:58 < adsb> if people care that much then maybe udd actually wants to run a
local uscan copy. but I'm not a service admin, just a machine one
09:58 < adsb> (there are reasons not to do that as well of course)
10:00 < doge-tech> Not a bad idea. UDD could pull the latest uscan from the
devscripts repo and use that instead. I'm not an anything admin though
(just a guy who's interested), so I'm always happy to be
shot down. :)
10:02 < doge-tech> There would be a risk to the stability of UDD in doing that,
of course
10:06 < adsb> well, it's work for lucas, so he might not want to :)
Lucas
