Re: Meltdown fix for wheezy-backports
* Richard Hector <richard@walnut.gen.nz> [2018-01-12 08:33:42 CET]:
> 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?
It does mention deprecation of LTS support for backports, and wheezy is
LTS. It didn't work out in the past.
Of course oldstable can be considered a source for backports to
oldoldstable, but please read that paragraph again:
| Unfortunately it didn't worked, most maintainers didn't wanted to
| support oldoldstable-backports (squeeze) for the lifetime of LTS. So
| things started to rot in squeeze and most packages didn't received
| updates. After long discussions we decided to deprecate LTS support for
| backports.
Yes, it was talking about squeeze there, but now that wheezy is LTS how
do you expect that issue of noone maintaining the oldoldstable-backports
magically changed, given that wheezy is now oldoldstable?
> I had kind of assumed that as long as n and n+1 remained supported,
> backports would also exist.
And it's existing. It's just not maintained. That workload can't be
on the shoulders of the backports team which consists of just two
people, so it depends on individual maintainers wanting to do it.
LTS is supported through financing people working on it. Backports for
LTS aren't. See the difference?
Enjoy,
Rhonda
--
Fühlst du dich mutlos, fass endlich Mut, los |
Fühlst du dich hilflos, geh raus und hilf, los | Wir sind Helden
Fühlst du dich machtlos, geh raus und mach, los | 23.55: Alles auf Anfang
Fühlst du dich haltlos, such Halt und lass los |
Reply to: