Re: [H-source-users] Debian version at h-node

[Antonio Gallo]

It is done! Debian >= 6.0 with only the main archive enabled is
officially allowed to h-node. I've put on the front page a text approved
by FSF.

Let's see how it goes!

Antonio 

Il giorno ven, 16/05/2014 alle 22.04 +0200, Antonio Gallo ha scritto:
> Ok this is right, better give the possibility to specify unstable or
> testing and to have the risk to give more details rather than less
> 
> Antonio
> 
> Il giorno ven, 16/05/2014 alle 14.57 -0400, John Sullivan ha scritto:
> > address@hidden (Michał Masłowski) writes:
> > 
> > >>> Testing and unstable have no VERSION_ID in /etc/os_release.  We could
> > >>> have a "debian" code for them (due to the above naming: no version) and
> > >>> rely on the kernel/driver version numbers.  It would be like Parabola.
> > >>
> > >> Do you suggest to use the code "debian" for both testing and unstable?
> > >
> > > Packages usually are moved from unstable to testing.  I think there
> > > isn't much value in knowing if if a device worked with testing or
> > > unstable several months ago: one field might be enough.  For other uses,
> > > kernel/driver version info should be sufficient, so users find which
> > > stable versions or backports are supported.
> > >
> > > Maybe our Debian users have more experience that would help here.
> > 
> > It seems valuable to me -- I assume a device is listed with all of the
> > codes it's been tested with. After several months, a device will
> > probably have both unstable and testing codes on it. But until then,
> > it's useful to know that it's only been tested with unstable. 
> > 
> > Ultimately, it's almost surely the kernel version that matters, so
> > keeping track of distro versions at all is a little roundabout -- but we
> > do it that way to make things simpler for users and contributors.
> > 
> > If we don't have the unstable code, what do contributors using unstable
> > say?
> > 
> > -john
> > 
> 
> 
>