Re: Why are backports of Squeeze packages in etch-backports?

To: backports-users@lists.backports.org
Subject: Re: Why are backports of Squeeze packages in etch-backports?
From: Alexander Wirt <formorer@formorer.de>
Date: Mon, 2 Mar 2009 15:06:54 +0100
Message-id: <[🔎] 20090302140654.GM12703@apu.snow-crash.org>
In-reply-to: <[🔎] 20090302132836.GH21159@phys.ethz.ch>
References: <[🔎] 20090302132836.GH21159@phys.ethz.ch>

Axel Beckert schrieb am Monday, den 02. March 2009:

> Hi,
> 
*snip* 
> Having backports of Squeeze packages in etch-backports doesn't really
> make a dist-upgrade from Etch to Lenny easier.
See:
http://lists.backports.org/lurker-bpo/message/20090220.215045.8a623425.en.html

Alex

Reply to:

Follow-Ups:
- Re: Why are backports of Squeeze packages in etch-backports?
  - From: Dominic Hargreaves <dom@earth.li>

References:
- Why are backports of Squeeze packages in etch-backports?
  - From: Axel Beckert <beckert@phys.ethz.ch>

Prev by Date: Why are backports of Squeeze packages in etch-backports?
Next by Date: Re: Why are backports of Squeeze packages in etch-backports?
Previous by thread: Why are backports of Squeeze packages in etch-backports?
Next by thread: Re: Why are backports of Squeeze packages in etch-backports?
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread