> On Mon, 27 Jun 2011 12:07:28 -0300, D G Teed wrote:
> > On Mon, Jun 27, 2011 at 11:52 AM, Camaleón <noela...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Of course, "squeeze-updates" is the new "volatile", nothing has changed.
>
> > Our expectations for squeeze-updates to release clamav ahead of stable
> > merely to be current are correct.
>
> Then it has to be a new policy. IIRC, not all of the clamav package
> updates reached the stable branch via volatile (now squeeze-updates),
> only those that closed security bugfixes. And I say this because I asked
> this same question here, months ago, and I was told so ;-)
I don't know about policy, but my experience with clamav from
lenny-volatile was that the engine itself actually did update,
typically within a few weeks after it started squawking.
My understanding for squeeze-updates was that it was intended
to serve the same role for squeeze, i.e. that time-critical new
versions which were not necessarily security-related would come
through this pipe.
ClamAV is the archetypical example for this, but given the recent
announcements, I wonder if iceweasel might find itself in this
channel also....
-- A.
--
Andrew Reid / rei...@bellatlantic.net
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/201106272244.26736.rei...@bellatlantic.net
