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

Reply via email to