A backport should not be needed for wheezy as it is testing, it should just move in to testing, as you can see on the pts page ( http://packages.qa.debian.org/f/flightgear.html ) this hasn't happened yet.
As for squeeze, openscenegraph would have to be backported first, so its not something I plan to look at. On 24 September 2011 18:35, Arnt Karlsen <a...@c2i.net> wrote: > Hi, > > ..is anyone backporting flightgear-2.4 for squeeze and wheezy? > http://www.flightgear.org/news/flightgear-v2-4-0-released/ > http://packages.debian.org/search?suite=squeeze-backports&searchon=names&keywords=flightgear > http://packages.debian.org/search?suite=sid&searchon=names&keywords=flightgear > http://packages.debian.org/search?suite=wheezy&searchon=names&keywords=flightgear > http://packages.debian.org/search?suite=squeeze&searchon=names&keywords=flightgear > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > All of the data generated in your IT infrastructure is seriously valuable. > Why? It contains a definitive record of application performance, security > threats, fraudulent activity, and more. Splunk takes this data and makes > sense of it. IT sense. And common sense. > http://p.sf.net/sfu/splunk-d2dcopy2 > _______________________________________________ > Flightgear-devel mailing list > Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ All of the data generated in your IT infrastructure is seriously valuable. Why? It contains a definitive record of application performance, security threats, fraudulent activity, and more. Splunk takes this data and makes sense of it. IT sense. And common sense. http://p.sf.net/sfu/splunk-d2dcopy2 _______________________________________________ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
