On Fri, Oct 12, 2007 at 06:17:43PM +0100, Andrew Suffield wrote: > > I think shorewall would be a suitable candidate for uploading into > volatile-sloppy, which lets users install individual updated packages > on stable systems. That should eliminate this issue, for both the > current release and future ones. (Other well-known packages which are > handled by the volatile system include spamassassin and clamav; > shorewall would get filed under 'sloppy' because upgrades across > releases require administrative attention to changes in the config > files, so should not be performed automatically) > > Basically, a user would run a pure Debian-stable system on their > firewall, with the single exception of the shorewall package. > Personally, I would prefer to go the backports.org route. What would be the advantages of the volatile route?
Regards, -Roberto -- Roberto C. Sánchez http://people.connexer.com/~roberto http://www.connexer.com
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc. Still grepping through log files to find problems? Stop. Now Search log events and configuration files using AJAX and a browser. Download your FREE copy of Splunk now >> http://get.splunk.com/
_______________________________________________ Shorewall-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/shorewall-devel
