From 1be510f9529cb082f802408b472a77d074b394c0 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Nicolas Vigier Date: Sun, 14 Apr 2013 13:46:12 +0000 Subject: Add zarb MLs html archives --- zarb-ml/mageia-dev/2012-June/016312.html | 119 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 119 insertions(+) create mode 100644 zarb-ml/mageia-dev/2012-June/016312.html (limited to 'zarb-ml/mageia-dev/2012-June/016312.html') diff --git a/zarb-ml/mageia-dev/2012-June/016312.html b/zarb-ml/mageia-dev/2012-June/016312.html new file mode 100644 index 000000000..514749020 --- /dev/null +++ b/zarb-ml/mageia-dev/2012-June/016312.html @@ -0,0 +1,119 @@ + + + + [Mageia-dev] Backports policy clarification (and discussion) + + + + + + + + + +

[Mageia-dev] Backports policy clarification (and discussion)

+ blind Pete + 0123peter at gmail.com +
+ Sat Jun 9 09:11:41 CEST 2012 +

+
+ +
AL13N wrote:
+
+> Op vrijdag 8 juni 2012 20:40:04 schreef Samuel Verschelde:
+>> Le vendredi 8 juin 2012 16:58:24, andre999 a écrit :
+> [...]
+>> > But wouldn't current tools update backports if backports are active ?
+>> 
+>> No, they wouldn't :)
+> 
+> but isn't this a bug? just like nonfree/tainted... etc...
+
+Yes.  For a workaround add "update" to /etc/urpmi/urpmi.cfg 
+backports section.  
+
+> code to detect what you had and use it for next upgrade, would be good.
+> but that would not be easy, unless we just keep it simple and fallback if
+> people don't have a standard layout.
+> 
+> In any case,
+> 
+> Stormi: what is your suggestion to change in the backport policy? or do
+> you think we can keep it, but we'd need alot more effort for some
+> "features"?
+
+-- 
+blind Pete
+Sig goes here...  
+
+
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
+

+ +
+More information about the Mageia-dev +mailing list
+ -- cgit v1.2.1