On Thursday 08 June 2006 20:08, Sven Luther wrote: > On Thu, Jun 08, 2006 at 07:16:57PM +0200, Frans Pop wrote: > > Only if we _would_ include some backports repository that is known to > > have a current backported kernel and all other packages needed with > > that kernel, but without random backports of other packages. And we > > would need some guarantees about the maintenance of and procedures > > for changes in such a repository (compare volatile.d.n). > > volatile.d.n is not a valid solution for this, since it doesn't allow > for a flexible enough upload of packages Would you please _read_ before you reply? I did not suggest using volatile for this. I was only saying that a repository with such backported packages would need a similar (though different) policy like aba and zobel formulated for volatile). I have not seen a formal policy defined for the kernel.debian.org repos that would make it suitable for this purpose for the d-i.
Attachment:
pgp4l5jybynR9.pgp
Description: PGP signature