Dan,
> On the other hand, upgrade your webserver to a backports version,
> and the webserver has been compiled against the libs you already have.
thanks! Is this also one of the reasons why not all packages in
testing are available via backports? I mean I could imagine that there
are packages which require some features which are provided only by
libraries available for "testing" and thus the package can not be
available via backports.
thanks,
Martin
On Wed, Dec 7, 2016 at 2:37 AM, Dan Ritter <d...@randomstring.org> wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 07, 2016 at 01:45:45AM +0200, Martin T wrote:
>>
>> what are advantages of using Debian "backports"("jessie-backports" in
>> sources.list file) over "testing"("testing" in sources.list file)? As
>> I understand, "backports" does not have all the packages from
>> "testing". On the other hand, packages in "backports" are specially
>> recompiled for "stable" so I guess they might provide better
>> stability(?).
>>
>
> Suppose that you have a webserver that depends on OpenSSL, libc,
> and, oh, libasn1.
>
> All of those libraries are likely to get new versions in
> testing. If you upgrade your webserver to testing, they all come
> along for the ride.
>
> On the other hand, upgrade your webserver to a backports
> version, and the webserver has been compiled against the libs
> you already have.
>
> Meanwhile, your mail server also needs OpenSSL and libc, and
> you don't want to push that to new versions yet...
>
> -dsr-
