Re: chromium not in Squeeze: a bit of communication needed?
On Wed, Sep 8, 2010 at 5:55 PM, Sven Joachim <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> On 2010-09-08 16:10 +0200, Michael Gilbert wrote:
>> I think that this need is justification to declare backports "officially
>> supported by the debian project". Thus when asked this question, you
>> can point to the fact that chromium is indeed supported on stable, just
>> via a different model than folks are used to. That is of course
>> assuming someone is willing to support the backport.
> It also means that users need to be taught how to change the apt pinning
> priority for backports, because in the default configuration backported
> packages are never updated automatically. Which is very bad from a
> security point of view.
Yes, but it is not the best solution. Someone already proposed in
another thread (about 'backports') to change the default archive pin
from '1' to '200' (in fact any value >=100 and <500, 200 is just my
favorite) so that packages from backports will still have a lower
priority over the packages from stable/security/volatile but also to
be able to install them without pinning all the involved packages if
the package only exists on backports.