Re: Backports on Squeeze
On Mon, Jul 02, 2012 at 08:10:07AM +0300, Andrei POPESCU wrote:
> On Lu, 02 iul 12, 15:46:40, Chris Bannister wrote:
> > I think there is an issue regarding security updates. Also I think you
> > need appropriate pinning, maybe wrong though.
>
> Would you care to elaborate on this? The default pinning (priority 100)
> will make sure you do get updates, but don't install new backports
> unless specifically requested.
So you need to keep physically checking (maybe apt-cache policy) when a
new backport is available?
Ahh, OK I see debian-backports-changes@lists.debian.org, but seems
fairly high volume.
I have vague memories of when I was running iceweasel in Lenny from
backports I had to mess around with the -t switch for its dependencies
(xulrunner, and a libmoz library) because I didn't pin them but I had
iceweasel pinned. I followed the instructions from the backports
repository. But I see, now that backports is officially under the Debian
umbrella, that the instructions are different.
It was a while ago, and things change.
That is why I added "maybe wrong though." So the OP could double-check
for himself.
> > Also remember to disable backports before updating to wheezy.
> > Release notes will probably mention this.
>
> Shouldn't be necessary, the backports versioning is specifically
> designed so that the version in testing is higher (the magic of ~)
http://www.debian.org/releases/stable/i386/release-notes/ch-upgrading.en.html#userbackports
But now that backports are official, that will no longer be valid?
--
"If you're not careful, the newspapers will have you hating the people
who are being oppressed, and loving the people who are doing the
oppressing." --- Malcolm X
Reply to: