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

Re: Please remove non-lts architectures from wheezy-security



On Wed, 2016-05-04 at 16:48 +0200, Tom Turelinckx wrote:
> Hello Paul,
> 
> This approach works fine, thanks for the suggestion:
> 
> deb http://ftp.be.debian.org/debian wheezy main contrib non-free
> deb-src http://ftp.be.debian.org/debian wheezy main contrib non-free
> 
> deb http://ftp.be.debian.org/debian wheezy-updates main contrib non-free
> deb-src http://ftp.be.debian.org/debian wheezy-updates main contrib non-free
> 
> deb http://snapshot.debian.org/archive/debian-security/20160427T220235Z wheezy/updates main contrib non-free
> deb-src http://snapshot.debian.org/archive/debian-security/20160427T220235Z wheezy/updates main contrib non-free
> 
> I'm simply surprised that these packages have disappeared from
> security.debian.org before having been properly archived (and without
> any pointer in that direction on the Security Team FAQ or the LTS
> wiki - which is otherwise very clear and informative on what to do on
> LTS-supported architectures).
[...]

As I understand it, packages are never moved directly from oldstable-
security to archive.debian.org.  Normally they are copied to oldstable
in a final point release, and then moved to archive.debian.org.  In
this case, there was a point release on 2nd April and none at the
transition to LTS.

This is fine for the LTS architectures since wheezy-security still
exists on security.debian.org.  But it seems no-one thought through
how the other architectures' recent security uploads would get
archived.  And since all wheezy LTS uploads are also going into wheezy-
security, I think we're going to have the same issue at the end of LTS.

So I think there needs to be some kind of pseudo-point-release for
wheezy to straighten out the non-LTS architectures now, and another one
at the end of LTS..

Ben.

-- 
Ben Hutchings
In a hierarchy, every employee tends to rise to his level of incompetence.

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part


Reply to: