Is somthing wrong with Pale Moon repository for Debian?

[peiner]

Today "apt" wants to update Pale Moon for Linux from your repository (Debian buster/testing). But there are no changes in version number. It's still palemoon_28.2.2~repack-1_amd64.deb

Then I noticed that time stamps on your sever has changed from 06-Dec-2018 to 08-Jan-2019. My first thougt was: WTF ... malware infection or something else?

https://download.opensuse.org/repositories/home:/stevenpusser/Debian_Testing/amd64/

Last modified today! https://download.opensuse.org/repositories/home:/stevenpusser/Debian_Testing/amd64/palemoon_28.2.2~repack-1_amd64.deb.mirrorlist

What's the reason for new .deb package files on server?

[Moonchild]

Steve's working on fixing up a few metadata things in the deb package; I guess it may cause some updates to their last update date

[bgstack15]

On the topic of dpkg, does Debian have a convention for a new package release of the same application version? It looks to me like the "repack-1" could helpfully be incremented, but perhaps I misunderstand.

In Fedora/RHEL/CentOS, one normally uses a dash to separate the application version from the package iteration. For example, from my Fedora COPR for Pale Moon:

Code: Select all

palemoon-28.2.2-1.x86_64.rpm

If I make any changes to how it is packaged/bundled/released in the rpm, I would make it a -2.

Code: Select all

palemoon-28.2.2-2.x86_64.rpm/[code]
The package release counter starts over at 1 (silly human languages) when upstream releases a new version, but some projects do actually start at rpm release 0.

[stevenpusser]

I didn't make any updates recently to the repo, but will soon for PM 28.3.0. However, you referenced the Debian testing repo, where new package versions rolling into Buster in the OBS can trigger an automatic rebuild of Pale Moon to use a new library version--in that case, it still has the same PM version. (It also looks like I can add an Ubuntu_Next repo to make 19.04 packages, but that will be a snapshot with frozen packages--maybe).

One of the automatic Buster rebuilds failed recently, but I think it was earlier than the 8th. I just hit a link called "trigger rebuild" in that case, if all the other build requirements are met.

Stable versions of distros don't see that kind of rebuilding churn. Debian uses the same sort of convention, where the "-n" number denotes a packaging revision, as other distros. If I did revise the debian/copyright file in 28.2.0, I would have incremented that to a -2, but decided to wait until 28.3.0 so I wouldn't push a fairly pointless update of 28.2.0 to everyone. Some people still have limited bandwidth.

[stevenpusser]

Yup--for stable distros, they were all built on Jan 15th, but Buster has already at least one automatic rebuild. Ubuntu Next hasn't had any yet.

Is it apt showing that it's a newer version based on the build date, or some other package updater?

Code: Select all

apt list --upgradeable

The automatic rebuilds should quiet down once Buster enters a harder freeze, though.

[stevenpusser]

And now it shows that Buster builds are unresolvable, due to a missing gcc-6-base package: https://build.opensuse.org/package/show ... r/palemoon

The previously-built packages from the 17th are still available--I hope they are still compatible.