On Tue, Dec 21, 2021 at 02:19:50PM +0100, john doe wrote:
On 12/21/2021 10:41 AM, Andrea Bolognani wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 20, 2021 at 10:59:15PM +0100, Martin Kletzander wrote:
> > Any reason for debian not having an -unknown version like lot of the
> > other distros?
>
> I don't think there's a specific reason for that, it's probably just
> a matter of nobody thinking of it until now :)
>
> In addition to that, considering that there already entries for
> Debian testing and Fedora Rawhide, adding one for Debian unstable
> might make sense too.
>
That would be lovely if 'debian-unknown' and 'debian11' could be
available on Bullseye!!! :)
Is it intentional that the Debian URLs in the output of 'osinfo-query
os' point to 'debian.org/debian/VERSION_ID' instead of
'debian.org/releases/VERSION_ID|VERSION_CODENAME'?
The URLs are not a pointer to any specific resource. They are just an
arbitrarily invented unique identifier & once released, we must never
change any URL. By convention we pick a short "product name" as the
first path component, because over time vendors have introduced new
or parallel products. Thus '/releases/' would not be future proof.
As an example, Fedora has both the traditional 'fedora' OS releases
and 'silverblue'.
Regards,
Daniel
--
|:
https://berrange.com -o-
https://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange :|
|:
https://libvirt.org -o-
https://fstop138.berrange.com :|
|:
https://entangle-photo.org -o-
https://www.instagram.com/dberrange :|