[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

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


On Mon, Mar 02, 2009 at 04:15:37PM +0100, Alexander Wirt wrote:
[Backports of Squeeze packages in Etch-Backports]
> > Not allowing such backports would indeed make direct upgrades to lenny
> > much easier, and it seems a great shame to risk breaking upgrades in
> > this way.
> > 
> > I'd say that it was reasonable for people who want things backported
> > from squeeze to need to upgrade to the current stable release first.
> It is the same policy as we had for sarge-bpo so I just adapted it
> here and nobody complained against it.

Yeah, I only read the subject of that mail since you pre-announced it
more or less a few weeks before and I had to catch up with mails after
being out of office for nearly one week -- my fault.

> I would say its too late now,


> but this point will be discussed for squeeze-bpo.

Cool, thanks!

My suggestion for a solution (although I know from IRC that Alex won't
like it :-) is, to have two APT repositories for oldstable -- in case
of etch this would be:

  etch-stable-backports (for backports with no higher version than in stable)
  etch-testing-backports (for backports with versions from testing)

		Kind regards, Axel Beckert
Axel Beckert <beckert@phys.ethz.ch>       support: +41 44 633 26 68
IT Services Group, HPT D 17                 voice: +41 44 633 41 89
Departement of Physics, ETH Zurich
CH-8093 Zurich, Switzerland		   http://nic.phys.ethz.ch/

Reply to: