Op 19-04-15 om 20:59 schreef Turbo Fredriksson: > On Apr 19, 2015, at 8:25 PM, Geert Stappers wrote: > >> What is the danger of having backports (default) enabled? > > From what I've seen (when I tried it a couple of years ago), is that > the back porting is quite … "sloppy". If the package needs a newer lib, > that is back ported as well. And the newer lib that depends on etc, etc. > > Eventually, you end up with such a bastardizised version of dist, it > simply WILL break in mysterious ways (and it have for me, which is why > is stopped using it).
Did you check if it really was backports? I use backports on all machines I care about, and I never had dependency problems from backports (so far I remember). > The correct way is, off course, to do the back port properly, make the > software work with the version of the libraries etc that's already in > the repo/dist. So far I know backports are made the correct way. This type of problems are most of time coming from other repositories, outside Debian. If you don't want backports for some reason, is easy to disable them in sources.list. With regards, Paul vand er Vlis. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
