On Fri, May 04, 2012 at 06:18:14AM -0400, Ariel wrote: > > On Fri, 4 May 2012, Mike Hommey wrote: > > >On Fri, May 04, 2012 at 05:17:28AM -0400, Ariel wrote: > > >>Is it possible for this fix to be included in the backports as > >>well? I just upgraded from 11 to 12 and the search engines were > >>reordered (apparently randomly). > > > >The fix is in the backports. But if you used one of the affected > >versions, you're likely to be hit by a problem at upgrade. This is > >unfortunate, but there is not much that can be done without a lot of > >work. > > > >Affected versions are 11.0-3, 11.0-4, 10.0.3esr-3 and their > >corresponding backports. > > > >I don't think there are enough people having used these versions > >and reordering/deleting search engines to spend time on the upgrade > >issue from these versions. What is important is upgrades from stable, > >and this works properly (unless proven otherwise) > > But will it happen again on the next upgrade (12 to 13 or a point > release of 12)? If not then that's fine. > > But if, because I used one of the bad versions, it will always > reorder, then that's not good.
It should be okay when upgrading from a non affected version to another non affected version. If it's not, please file a new bug. Mike -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected]
