Florian Weimer wrote: > >> Can volatile receive critical updates which are usually not applied to > >> stable because backports are not available for some reason? > > > > Are you speaking about mozilla? ;) > > Mozilla, GnuPG, and maybe even PHP 4, depending on sarge's lifetime. > Other complex packages can easily enter this state, too, especially > when sarge has been around for a year or two. > > Actually, Mozilla's situation is beginning to look rather promising. > The distributor community seems to pick up the challenge and issue > patches. Of course, if we release 1.6 with sarge (a version that is > officially unsupported by upstream), we might not be able to profit > from this development.
This sounds more like a backports issue than anything that should go into volatile if the intention of volatile shouldn't be changed (and I hope it won't). Regards, Joey -- Those who don't understand Unix are condemned to reinvent it, poorly. Please always Cc to me when replying to me on the lists.