On Lu, 22 mar 21, 07:26:27, The Wanderer wrote: > On 2021-03-22 at 07:22, Andrei POPESCU wrote: > > > > In any case, backports is, by definition, lagging behind testing. > > Yes, but that should only be reflected in the fact that the package > version is different, not in which packages are available (barring the > case where the newer version changed which packages get built, which > doesn't apply here). Except that the package name in backports is different, i.e. the package is rebuilt for backports (in a stable build environment) and it also has its name changed. > Note that I checked the stable-backports listing for the version > specified in the OP, and the testing listing for the version shown on my > system as available in testing. > > If that's not the root of your point, then I'm missing it, and would be > glad to see it explained. My point is that whatever is (already) in testing provides little clue for what should be in backports, especially for linux-image packages that have the signing step in addition to a rebuild with changing the package name. Besides, only some linux-image versions in testing will get a backports upload. Kind regards, Andrei -- http://wiki.debian.org/FAQsFromDebianUser
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature