On 12/01/18 19:50, Alexander Wirt wrote: > On Fri, 12 Jan 2018, Ben Hutchings wrote: > >> On Wed, 2018-01-10 at 11:13 -0600, Xan Charbonnet wrote: >>> Hello, >>> >>> Is a Meltdown fix for the wheezy-backports kernel (3.16) on the way? >>> Thanks very much! >> >> I'm sorry to tell you that wheezy-backports has not been supported for >> nearly a year now. This was never widely announced (I can no longer >> find the announcement) and I think this end-of-life was handled >> extremely badly by the backports administrators. > It was handled badly by the backporters. I really hope you don't expect > the administrators to do the backports. There was a discussion and nearly > noone was in favour of doing those backports. > > And of course we announced it - as we always do announce changes: > > https://backports.debian.org/news/stretch-backports/ > https://lists.debian.org/debian-backports/2017/06/msg00055.html That doesn't actually mention wheezy at all. Is oldstable, even if maintained, never considered a source for (non-sloppy) backports to oldoldstable? I had kind of assumed that as long as n and n+1 remained supported, backports would also exist. Richard
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature