Sander Lepik wrote: > 09.06.2012 13:29, andre999 kirjutas: >> OK. To backport from Cauldron to mga1, we have to backport from Cauldron >> to mga2, (bumping the revision in cauldron to ensure that is is higher), >> then backport from mga2 to >> mga1, ensuring that the revision is lower in mga1 than in mga2. (e.g. >> revision x.1 in >> cauldron, x.0.1 in mga2, x.0.0.1 in mga1) Pretty straight forward. >> >> - Cherry-picking refers to the users' option to install a backport, which >> has nothing to do with the packaging itself. >> >> - Ensure that upgrades never fail : Properly packaged, there is no >> reason why any available backports will not install properly, as long as >> the tools are appropriately >> adjusted. Backports should install just as reliably as regular updates. >> Of course, if a particular backport or update is not available, it won't >> install. Packages requiring it should not install either, which may not >> always be the case now. (This should be verified - for backports and >> updates.) > I see backports as the way to get some new stuff from cauldron before > cauldron is fully stable. There is no point to backport from cauldron to > n-2 (mga1 at the moment). If the user wants so much newer stuff s/he > better upgrade to latest stable. > > To not fail upgrade you must make sure that n-1 backports are not newer > than n +n's updates. You can't enable backports repo at upgrade time or it > would upgrade all possible packages from backports repo. I'm quite sure > most users don't want that to happen! Cherry-picking for me means that i > can upgrade some packages from backports and then disable the repo. After > that i'm still able to upgrade to fully stable next release (w/o > backports).
Create a key word "cherry-picking" for urpmi.cfg? > -- > Sander -- blind Pete Sig goes here...
