andre999 wrote: > blind Pete a écrit : >> andre999 wrote: >> >> >>> blind Pete a écrit : >>> >>>> Samuel Verschelde wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> > [snip] >>> - Functioning as an update, it would only replace already installed >>> backports, once the tools are appropriately adjusted. >>> >> There are a couple of ways to do that. The simplest that I can think >> of is to split "backports" into "backports" and "backports update". >> Allow cherry picking from "backports" and apply "backports update" >> automatically. >> > > I was thinking of cases where the user chooses to "update" their > system. New versions of backports already installed would be presented > as updates, along with those from the update repos. > Just as we don't have any update-update repos, it wouldn't make sense to > have backport-update repos either. [snip]
It depends on how you look at it. If you consider non-free, tainted, and backport to be optional and any update package to be highly recommended if and only if the corresponding package is already installed. Then is does not matter if the old package is a tainted.rpm, nonfree.rpm, bp.rpm, or an ordinary rpm. Just one way to look at it, not the only way. -- blind Pete Sig goes here...
