Am So., 2. Juni 2024 um 01:44 Uhr schrieb Thomas Ward < [email protected]>:
> I’m just going to comment on this bit here because I’m on the Ubuntu side > of things with a number of hats INCLUDING Ubuntu Backporters. > > > > - I think (not sure anymore) Ubuntu-backports uses a meta-package like > linux-image-amd64-bookworm-backports. > > > > No, this is incorrect. You may be thinking specifically of cases where > later kernels are made available to the LTS releases as individual updates > during the point releases of LTS for Hardware Enablement – in those cases > we have `linux-image-generic-hwe` metapackage with updated kernels > available, but those are not considered “backports” in the same way Debian > Backports would be. > > > > In fact, the Ubuntu Backporters team ***explicitly forbids*** backporting > of the kernel or associated packages as you can see per our “special case” > and “forbidden packages” patterns here [1]. The HWE kernels in Ubuntu are > specially handled, and not ‘backports’ in the sense that it’d have the > Backporters groups touching it. And that’s ONLY for the LTS in Ubuntu. > > > > So no, your statement that Ubuntu does this as backports is not correct. > It’s done by the Kernel team, and only for LTSes to enable later hardware > enablement, it is NOT just a “separate chain” of packages or Linux > dependencies. > > > > Sure, you can install numerous kernels yourself. You can even install > separate kernel packages or compile your own. It doesn’t mean these’re > actually “backports” nor something that should be considered for regular > backporting, etc. because even in Ubuntu the ‘backported’ kernels are > heavily tested and ‘special case’ for the LTS release (which is different > than Debian). > > > > [1]: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UbuntuBackports#Forbidden_packages > > > > > > Thomas > > Ubuntu Developer > > Ubuntu Backporter > Hello Thomas, Thank you for this clarification and explanation. I really misremembered this. > > > *From:* Johan Kröckel <[email protected]> > *Sent:* Saturday, June 1, 2024 07:34 > *To:* [email protected] > *Subject:* linux-image backports metapackage > > > > Hello everybody, > > > > I think I asked this before but I'd like to have both the current stable > and backports kernels installed. > > > > When I upgrade linux-image-amd64 to the backports version the stable > kernel is not upgraded anymore. When I just install the current backports > package directly, like linux-image-6.7.12+bpo-amd64, it stays at that > version. > > > > I think (not sure anymore) Ubuntu-backports uses a meta-package > like linux-image-amd64-bookworm-backports. > > > > Wouldn't this be a solution or why would that be a bad/unfeasible idea? > > > > Thank you > > > > Johan >
