On 2023-11-15 18:06:45 +0000, Tixy wrote: > On Wed, 2023-11-15 at 18:15 +0100, Vincent Lefevre wrote: > > On 2023-11-15 16:39:15 -0000, Curt wrote: > > > On 2023-11-14, Vincent Lefevre <vinc...@vinc17.net> wrote: > > > > > > > > The base number is the same, but I would have thought that this other > > > > kernel might have additional patches. > > > > > > > > > That's why I suggested ignoring the message. > > > > > > > > Then why does reportbug mention the bullseye-backports kernel? > > > > > > Because it kind of looks newer if you're a not very bright software > > > construct, he opined. > > > > But the bookworm-backports kernel is even newer. > > So why not this one? > > Because it's a different package?
There is no guarantee that a package with the same name in a different distribution has the same meaning (because packages get renamed...). So I would say that this is not a good reason. But I'm still wondering where reportbug gets this particular version 6.1.55+1~bpo11+1, as it is not in bullseye-backports. -- Vincent Lefèvre <vinc...@vinc17.net> - Web: <https://www.vinc17.net/> 100% accessible validated (X)HTML - Blog: <https://www.vinc17.net/blog/> Work: CR INRIA - computer arithmetic / AriC project (LIP, ENS-Lyon)
