On Fri, Oct 08, 2004 at 03:51:29PM -0400, Daniel Burrows wrote: > On Friday 08 October 2004 11:51 am, Andreas Barth wrote: > > - volatile is not "just another place" for backports, but should only > > contain changes to stable programs that are necessary to keep them > > functional; > > I generally have to resort to backports or unstable when installing Debian > on recent hardware, because we don't update hardware drivers in stable. > Would the kernel and X be candidates for volatile? >
Uhm, if I'm remembering right at potato time we had kernel upgrades, at least 2.2.17 -> 2.2.19. Unfortunately new kernels imply new big security concerns in many cases. Anyway, kernel and X are not typical targets for volatile: we are not proposing new stable releases, but only very localized changes for a few programs which are inerently subject to fast obsolescence (i.e. short-life applications). For those kind of things backports.org is the right answer. -- Francesco P. Lovergine
