Re: no-dsa vs. end-of-life

2016-01-27 Thread Guido Günther
On Tue, Jan 26, 2016 at 10:08:24PM +0100, Guido Günther wrote: > Hi, > I see many packages marked: > > [squeeze] - foo (not supported in Squeeze LTS) > > shouldn't that be > > [squeeze] - foo (not supported in Squeeze LTS) > > since no-dsa implies that the bug migh be fixe

Re: no-dsa vs. end-of-life

2016-01-26 Thread Moritz Mühlenhoff
On Tue, Jan 26, 2016 at 10:08:24PM +0100, Guido Günther wrote: > Hi, > I see many packages marked: > > [squeeze] - foo (not supported in Squeeze LTS) > > shouldn't that be > > [squeeze] - foo (not supported in Squeeze LTS) Indeed. Cheers, Moritz

Re: no-dsa vs. end-of-life

2016-01-26 Thread Markus Koschany
Am 26.01.2016 um 22:08 schrieb Guido Günther: > Hi, > I see many packages marked: > > [squeeze] - foo (not supported in Squeeze LTS) > > shouldn't that be > > [squeeze] - foo (not supported in Squeeze LTS) > > since no-dsa implies that the bug migh be fixed eventually in a

no-dsa vs. end-of-life

2016-01-26 Thread Guido Günther
Hi, I see many packages marked: [squeeze] - foo (not supported in Squeeze LTS) shouldn't that be [squeeze] - foo (not supported in Squeeze LTS) since no-dsa implies that the bug migh be fixed eventually in a later update? Cheers, -- Guido